Three-dimensional Structure of Acanthamoeba castellanii Myosin-IB (MIB) Determined by Cryoelectron Microscopy of Decorated Actin Filaments

The Acanthamoeba castellanii myosin-Is were the first unconventional myosins to be discovered, and the myosin-I class has since been found to be one of the more diverse and abundant classes of the myosin superfamily. We used two-dimensional (2D) crystallization on phospholipid monolayers and negative stain electron microscopy to calculate a projection map of a “classical” myosin-I, Acanthamoeba myosin-IB (MIB), at ∼18 Å resolution. Interpretation of the projection map suggests that the MIB molecules sit upright on the membrane. We also used cryoelectron microscopy and helical image analysis to determine the three-dimensional structure of actin filaments decorated with unphosphorylated (inactive) MIB. The catalytic domain is similar to that of other myosins, whereas the large carboxy-terminal tail domain differs greatly from brush border myosin-I (BBM-I), another member of the myosin-I class. These differences may be relevant to the distinct cellular functions of these two types of myosin-I. The catalytic domain of MIB also attaches to F-actin at a significantly different angle, ∼10°, than BBM-I. Finally, there is evidence that the tails of adjacent MIB molecules interact in both the 2D crystal and in the decorated actin filaments.The myosin superfamily consists of at least 12 distinct classes that vary both in the sequence of their conserved myosin catalytic domains as well as in their unique tails (Mooseker and Cheney, 1995; Sellers and Goodson, 1995). For many years the only known myosins were the double-headed, filament-forming myosins found in muscle (conventional myosins or myosins-II). The remaining classes of myosin have been termed “unconventional myosins” to differentiate them from the myosins-II. Probably the most thoroughly studied class of unconventional myosins is the myosin-I class. These small, single-headed myosins bind to membrane lipids through a basic domain in their tail (for review see Pollard et al., 1991; Mooseker and Cheney, 1995). The first unconventional myosin (and first myosin-I) was isolated from Acanthamoeba castellanii (Pollard and Korn, 1973 a,b), and was purified on the basis of its K⁺, EDTA, and actin-activated MgATPase activities. However, this myosin was unusual in that it had a single heavy chain of ∼140 kD, in contrast to the two ∼200-kD heavy chains of myosin-II (Pollard and Korn, 1973 a).Three isoforms of the classical Acanthamoeba myosins-I are now known: myosins-IA, -IB, and -IC (Maruta and Korn, 1977a ,b; Maruta et al., 1979). Each of the isoforms consists of a conserved myosin catalytic domain, a binding site for one or two light chains, a basic domain, a GPA¹(Q) domain (rich in glycine, proline and alanine [glutamine]), and an scr-homology domain-3 (SH3) domain (Pollard et al., 1991; Mooseker and Cheney, 1995). These myosins-I can associate with membranes or with actin filaments through their tail domains. An electrostatic association of myosin-I with anionic phospholipids and with base-stripped membranes has been shown to occur (Adams and Pollard, 1989; Miyata et al., 1989; Hayden et al., 1990), and this interaction has been mapped to the basic domain (Doberstein and Pollard, 1992). Interestingly, these myosins also contain a second, ATP-insensitive actin binding site (Lynch et al., 1986) enabling them to mediate actin–actin movements (Albanesi et al., 1985; Fujisaki et al., 1985). In myosin-IA (Lynch et al., 1986) and myosin-IC (Doberstein and Pollard, 1992), this binding site was localized to the GPA domain. Acanthamoeba myosins-I have maximal steady-state actin-activated ATPase rates of ∼10–20 s⁻¹ (Pollard and Korn, 1973 b; Albanesi et al., 1983), and an unusual triphasic dependence upon actin concentration (Pollard and Korn, 1973 b; Albanesi et al., 1983). This triphasic activation is due to the actin cross-linking ability imparted by the ATP-insensitive actin binding site on the tail (Albanesi et al., 1985). Analysis of the individual steps in the ATPase cycle by transient kinetics revealed that the mechanism of myosin-IA is similar to slow skeletal muscle myosin, whereas myosin-IB (MIB) is similar to fast skeletal muscle myosin (Ostap and Pollard, 1996). The in vitro motility of myosin-I has also been well characterized (Zot et al., 1992). The maximal rate of filament sliding is ∼0.2 μm s⁻¹. Interestingly, this rate is ∼10–50× slower than the rates observed for skeletal muscle myosin, even though the ATPase rates are comparable.MIB consists of a 125-kD heavy chain and a single 27-kD light chain (Maruta et al., 1979; Jung et al., 1987). This isoform is primarily associated with the plasma membrane as well as vacuolar membranes (Baines et al., 1992). MIB appears to be associated with the plasma membrane at sites of phagocytosis and was concentrated at the tips of pseudopodia (Baines et al., 1992). This localization suggests that MIB may be involved in membrane dynamics at the cell surface. MIB is regulated by heavy chain phosphorylation of serine 411 (Brzeska et al., 1989, 1990), which is located at the actin-binding site (Rayment et al., 1993). Similar to the myosin-I isoforms in Acanthamoeba, heavy chain phosphorylation results in >20-fold activation of the actin-activated myosin-I ATPase activity (Albanesi et al., 1983). This activation is not the result of changes in the binding of myosin-I to F-actin (Albanesi et al., 1983; Ostap and Pollard, 1996). The transient kinetic studies of Ostap and Pollard (1996) suggest that phosphorylation regulates the rate-limiting phosphate release step, the transition from weakly bound intermediates in rapid equilibrium with actin to strongly bound states, capable of sustaining force.Despite the extensive analysis of ameboid myosin-I biochemical properties and in vivo function, there is little structural information on these myosins. The only detailed structural information available for the myosins-I comes from recent electron microscopy studies on brush border myosin-I (BBM-I) (Jontes et al., 1995; Jontes and Milligan, 1997a ,b; Whittaker and Milligan, 1997), a structurally distinct myosin-I subtype. Therefore, we investigated the structure of a “classical,” ameboid-type myosin, Acanthamoeba MIB using electron microscopy. First, electron micrographs of negatively stained two-dimensional (2D) crystals were used to generate a projection map of MIB at ∼18 Å resolution. In addition, we used cryoelectron microscopy and helical image analysis to produce a moderate resolution three-dimensional (3D) map (30 Å) of actin filaments decorated with MIB. These studies enabled us to compare the structure of MIB with BBM-I. The comparison of MIB with BBM-I reveals marked structural differences in the tail domains of these two proteins; MIB appears to have a much shorter “lever arm” and a more compact tail, whereas most of the BBM-I mass is composed of an extended light chain–binding domain (LCBD). In addition, the MIB catalytic domain appears to be slightly tilted compared to BBM-I, with respect to the F-actin axis. Our structural results suggest that these two types of myosin-I may have distinct intracellular functions.     

Protection by natural IgG: a sweet partnership with soluble lectins does the trick!

EMBO J 32: 2905–2919 10.1038/emboj.2013.199; published online September032013Some B cells of the adaptive immune system secrete polyreactive immunoglobulin G (IgG) in the absence of immunization or infection. Owing to its limited affinity and specificity, this natural IgG is thought to play a modest protective role. In this issue, a report reveals that natural IgG binds to microbes following their opsonization by ficolin and mannan-binding lectin (MBL), two carbohydrate receptors of the innate immune system. The interaction of natural IgG with ficolins and MBL protects against pathogenic bacteria via a complement-independent mechanism that involves IgG receptor FcγRI expressing macrophages. Thus, natural IgG enhances immunity by adopting a defensive strategy that crossovers the conventional boundaries between innate and adaptive microbial recognition systems.The adaptive immune system generates protective somatically recombined antibodies through a T cell-dependent (TD) pathway that involves follicular B cells. After recognizing antigen through the B-cell receptor (BCR), follicular B cells establish a cognate interaction with CD4⁺ T follicular helper (T_FH) cells and thereafter either rapidly differentiate into short-lived IgM-secreting plasmablasts or enter the germinal centre (GC) of lymphoid follicles to complete class switch recombination (CSR) and somatic hypermutation (SHM) (Victora and Nussenzweig, 2012). CSR from IgM to IgG, IgA and IgE generates antibodies with novel effector functions, whereas SHM provides the structural correlate for the induction of affinity maturation (Victora and Nussenzweig, 2012). Eventually, this canonical TD pathway generates long-lived bone marrow plasma cells and circulating memory B cells that produce protective class-switched antibodies capable to recognize specific antigens with high affinity (Victora and Nussenzweig, 2012).In addition to post-immune monoreactive antibodies, B cells produce pre-immune polyreactive antibodies in the absence of conventional antigenic stimulation (Ehrenstein and Notley, 2010). These natural antibodies form a vast and stable repertoire that recognizes both non-protein and protein antigens with low affinity (Ehrenstein and Notley, 2010). Natural antibodies usually emerge from a T cell-independent (TI) pathway that involves innate-like B-1 and marginal zone (MZ) B cells. These are extrafollicular B-cell subsets that rapidly differentiate into short-lived antibody-secreting plasmablasts after detecting highly conserved microbial and autologus antigens through polyreactive BCRs and nonspecific germline-encoded pattern recognition receptors (Pone et al, 2012; Cerutti et al, 2013).The most studied natural antibody is IgM, a pentameric complement-activating molecule with high avidity but low affinity for antigen (Ehrenstein and Notley, 2010). In addition to promoting the initial clearance of intruding microbes, natural IgM regulates tissue homeostasis, immunological tolerance and tumour surveillance (Ochsenbein et al, 1999; Zhou et al, 2007; Ehrenstein and Notley, 2010). Besides secreting IgM, B-1 and MZ B cells produce IgG and IgA after receiving CSR-inducing signals from dendritic cells (DCs), macrophages and neutrophils of the innate immune system (Cohen and Norins, 1966; Cerutti et al, 2013). In humans, certain natural IgG and IgA are moderately mutated and show some specificity, which may reflect the ability of human MZ B cells to undergo SHM (Cerutti et al, 2013). Yet, natural IgG and IgA are generally perceived as functionally quiescent.In this issue, Panda et al show that natural IgG bound to a broad spectrum of bacteria with high affinity by cooperating with ficolin and MBL (Panda et al, 2013), two ancestral soluble lectins of the innate immune system (Holmskov et al, 2003). This binding involved some degree of specificity, because it required the presence of ficolin or MBL on the microbial surface as well as lower pH and decreased calcium concentration in the extracellular environment as a result of infection or inflammation (see Figure 1).Open in a separate windowFigure 1Ficolins and MBL are produced by hepatocytes and various cells of the innate immune system and opsonize bacteria after recognizing conserved carbohydrates. Low pH and calcium concentrations present under infection-inflammation conditions promote the interaction of ficolin or MBL with natural IgG on the surface of bacteria. The resulting immunocomplex is efficiently phagocytosed by macrophages through FcγR1 independently of the complement protein C3, leading to the clearance of bacteria.Ficolins and MBL are soluble pattern recognition receptors that opsonize microbes after binding to glycoconjugates through distinct carbohydrate recognition domain (CRD) structures (Holmskov et al, 2003). While ficolins use a fibrinogen domain, MBL and other members of the collectin family use a C-type lectin domain attached to a collagen-like region (Holmskov et al, 2003). Similar to pentraxins, ficolins and MBL are released by innate effector cells and hepatocytes, and thus may have served as ancestral antibody-like molecules prior to the inception of the adaptive immune system (Holmskov et al, 2003; Bottazzi et al, 2010). Of note, MBL and the MBL-like complement protein C1q are recruited by natural IgM to mediate complement-dependent clearance of autologous apoptotic cells and microbes (Holmskov et al, 2003; Ehrenstein and Notley, 2010). Panda et al found that a similar lectin-dependent co-optation strategy enhances the protective properties of natural IgG (Panda et al, 2013).By using bacteria and the bacterial glycan N-acetylglicosamine, Panda et al show that natural IgG isolated from human serum or T cell-deficient mice interacted with the fibrinogen domain of microbe-associated ficolins (Panda et al, 2013). The resulting immunocomplex was phagocytosed by macrophages via the IgG receptor FcγRI in a complement-independent manner (Panda et al, 2013). The additional involvement of MBL was demonstrated by experiments showing that natural IgG retained some bacteria-binding activity in the absence of ficolins (Panda et al, 2013).Surface plasmon resonance provided some clues regarding the molecular requirements of the ficolin–IgG interaction (Panda et al, 2013), but the conformational changes required by ficolin to interact with natural IgG remain to be addressed. In particular, it is unclear what segment of the effector Fc domain of natural IgG binds to ficolins and whether Fc-associated glycans are involved in this binding. Specific glycans have been recently shown to mitigate the inflammatory properties of IgG emerging from TI responses (Hess et al, 2013) and this process could implicate ficolins and MBL. Moreover, it would be important to elucidate whether and how the antigen-binding Fab portion of natural IgG regulates its interaction with ficolins and MBL.The in vivo protective role of natural IgG was elegantly demonstrated by showing that reconstitution of IgG-deficient mice lacking the CSR-enzyme activation-induced cytidine deaminase with natural IgG from T cell-insufficient animals enhanced resistance to pathogenic Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Panda et al, 2013). This protective effect was associated with reduced production of proinflammatory cytokines, occurred independently of the complement protein C3 and was impaired by peptides capable to inhibit the binding of natural IgG to ficolin (Panda et al, 2013). Additional in vivo studies will be needed to determine whether natural IgG exerts protective activity in mice lacking ficolin, MBL or FcγRI, and to ascertain whether these molecules also enhance the protective properties of canonical or natural IgG and IgA released by bone marrow plasma cells and mucosal plasma cells, respectively.In conclusion, the findings by Panda et al show that natural IgG adopts ‘crossover'' defensive strategies that blur the conventional boundaries between the innate and adaptive immune systems. The sophisticated integration of somatically recombined and germline-encoded antigen recognition systems described in this new study shall stimulate immunologists to further explore the often underestimated protective virtues of our vast natural antibody repertoire. This effort may lead to the development of novel therapies against infections.     

Critical Factors Determining Dimerization of Human Antizyme Inhibitor

Ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) is the first enzyme involved in polyamine biosynthesis, and it catalyzes the decarboxylation of ornithine to putrescine. ODC is a dimeric enzyme, whereas antizyme inhibitor (AZI), a positive regulator of ODC that is homologous to ODC, exists predominantly as a monomer and lacks decarboxylase activity. The goal of this paper was to identify the essential amino acid residues that determine the dimerization of AZI. The nonconserved amino acid residues in the putative dimer interface of AZI (Ser-277, Ser-331, Glu-332, and Asp-389) were substituted with the corresponding residues in the putative dimer interface of ODC (Arg-277, Tyr-331, Asp-332, and Tyr-389, respectively). Analytical ultracentrifugation analysis was used to determine the size distribution of these AZI mutants. The size-distribution analysis data suggest that residue 331 may play a major role in the dimerization of AZI. Mutating Ser-331 to Tyr in AZI (AZI-S331Y) caused a shift from a monomer configuration to a dimer. Furthermore, in comparison with the single mutant AZI-S331Y, the AZI-S331Y/D389Y double mutant displayed a further reduction in the monomer-dimer K_d, suggesting that residue 389 is also crucial for AZI dimerization. Analysis of the triple mutant AZI-S331Y/D389Y/S277R showed that it formed a stable dimer (K_d value = 1.3 μm). Finally, a quadruple mutant, S331Y/D389Y/S277R/E332D, behaved as a dimer with a K_d value of ∼0.1 μm, which is very close to that of the human ODC enzyme. The quadruple mutant, although forming a dimer, could still be disrupted by antizyme (AZ), further forming a heterodimer, and it could rescue the AZ-inhibited ODC activity, suggesting that the AZ-binding ability of the AZI dimer was retained.Polyamines (putrescine, spermidine, and spermine) have been shown to have both structural and regulatory roles in protein and nucleic acid biosynthesis and function (1–3). Ornithine decarboxylase (ODC,³ EC 4.1.1.17) is a central regulator of cellular polyamine synthesis (reviewed in Refs. 1, 4, 5). This enzyme catalyzes the pyridoxal 5-phosphate (PLP)-dependent decarboxylation of ornithine to putrescine, and it is the first and rate-limiting enzyme in polyamine biosynthesis (2, 3, 6, 7). ODC and polyamines play important roles in a number of biological functions, including embryonic development, cell cycle, proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis (8–15). They also have been associated with human diseases and a variety of cancers (16–26). Because the regulation of ODC and polyamine content is critical to cell proliferation (11), as well as in the origin and progression of neoplastic diseases (23, 24), ODC has been identified as an oncogenic enzyme, and the inhibitors of ODC and the polyamine pathway are important targets for therapeutic intervention in many cancers (6, 11).ODC is ubiquitously found in organisms ranging from bacteria to humans. It contains 461 amino acid residues in each monomer and is a 106-kDa homodimer with molecular 2-fold symmetry (27, 28). Importantly, ODC activity requires the formation of a dimer (29–31). X-ray structures of the ODC enzyme reveal that this dimer contains two active sites, both of which are formed at the interface between the N-terminal domain of one monomer, which provides residues involved in PLP interactions, and the C-terminal domain of the other subunit, which provides the residues that interact with substrate (27, 32–41).ODC undergoes a unique ubiquitin-independent proteasomal degradation via a direct interaction with the regulatory protein antizyme (AZ). Binding of AZ promotes the dissociation of the ODC homodimers and targets ODC for degradation by the 26 S proteasome (42–46). Current models of antizyme function indicate that increased polyamine levels promote the fidelity of the AZ mRNA translational frameshift, leading to increased concentrations of AZ (47). The AZ monomer selectively binds to dimeric ODC, thereby inactivating ODC by forming inactive AZ-ODC heterodimers (44, 48–50). AZ acts as a regulator of polyamine metabolism that inhibits ODC activity and polyamine transport, thus restricting polyamine levels (4, 5, 51, 52). When antizymes are overexpressed, they inhibit ODC and promote ubiquitin-independent proteolytic degradation of ODC. Because elevated ODC activity is associated with most forms of human malignancies (1), it has been suggested that antizymes may function as tumor suppressors.In contrast to the extensive studies on the oncogene ODC, the endogenous antizyme inhibitor (AZI) is less well understood. AZI is homologous to the enzyme ODC. It is a 448-amino acid protein with a molecular mass of 50 kDa. However, despite the homology between these proteins, AZI does not possess any decarboxylase activity. It binds to antizyme more tightly than does ODC and releases ODC from the ODC-antizyme complex (53, 54). Both the AZI and AZ proteins display rapid ubiquitin-dependent turnover within a few minutes to 1 h in vivo (5). However, AZ binding actually stabilizes AZI by inhibiting its ubiquitination (55).AZI, which inactivates all members of the AZ family (53, 56), restores ODC activity (54), and prevents the proteolytic degradation of ODC, may play a role in tumor progression. It has been reported that down-regulation of AZI is associated with the inhibition of cell proliferation and reduced ODC activity, presumably through the modulation of AZ function (57). Moreover, overexpression of AZI has been shown to increase cell proliferation and promote cell transformation (58–60). Furthermore, AZI is capable of direct interaction with cyclin D1, preventing its degradation, and this effect is at least partially independent of AZ function (60, 61). These results demonstrate a role for AZI in the positive regulation of cell proliferation and tumorigenesis.It is now known that ODC exists as a dimer and that AZI may exist as a monomer physiologically (62). Fig. 1 shows the dimeric structures of ODC (Fig. 1A) and AZI (Fig. 1B). Although structural studies indicate that both ODC and AZI crystallize as dimers, the dimeric AZI structure has fewer interactions at the dimer interface, a smaller buried surface area, and a lack of symmetry of the interactions between residues from the two monomers, suggesting that the AZI dimer may be nonphysiological (62). In this study, we identify the critical amino acid residues governing the difference in dimer formation between ODC and AZI. Our preliminary studies using analytical ultracentrifugation indicated that ODC exists as a dimer, whereas AZI exists in a concentration-dependent monomer-dimer equilibrium. Multiple sequence alignments of ODC and AZI from various species have shown that residues 277, 331, 332, and 389 are not conserved between ODC and AZI (Open in a separate windowFIGURE 1.Crystal structure and the amino acid residues at the dimer interface of human ornithine decarboxylase (hODC) and mouse antizyme inhibitor (mAZI). A, homodimeric structure of human ODC with the cofactor PLP analog, LLP (Protein Data Bank code 1D7K). B, putative dimeric structure of mouse AZI (Protein Data Bank code 3BTN). The amino acid residues in the dimer interface are shown as a ball-and-stick model. The putative AZ-binding site is colored in cyan. This figure was generated using PyMOL (DeLano Scientific LLC, San Carlos, CA).

TABLE 1

Amino acid residues at the dimer interface of human ODC and AZI

Compact Parkin only: insights into the structure of an autoinhibited ubiquitin ligase

EMBO J 32 15, 2099–2112 doi:10.1038/emboj.2013.125; published online May312013Mutations in Parkin represent ∼50% of disease-causing defects in autosomal recessive-juvenile onset Parkinson''s disease (AR-JP). Recently, there have been four structural reports of autoinhibited forms of this RING-IBR-RING (RBR) ubiquitin ligase (E3) by the Gehring, Komander, Johnston and Shaw groups. The important advances from these studies set the stage for the next steps in understanding the molecular basis for Parkinson''s disease (PD).Regulated protein degradation requires that E3s and their access to substrates be exquisitely controlled. RBR family E3s provide striking examples of this regulation. The complex and compact structures of Parkin (Riley et al, 2013; Spratt et al, 2013; Trempe et al, 2013; Wauer and Komander, 2013) as well as another RBR E3, human homologue of Ariadne (HHARI) (Duda et al, 2013), demonstrate extraordinarily intricate inter-domain arrangements. These autoinhibited structures ensure that their functions are restricted until activated.Until recently, RBR E3s were believed to be a subclass of RING E3s, which allosterically activate E2 conjugated with ubiquitin (E2∼Ub). However, Wenzel et al (2011) determined that they are actually hybrid E3s, containing an E2 binding site in RING1 and a catalytic cysteine residue in the domain designated as RING2. The catalytic cysteine is an acceptor for an ubiquitin from RING1-bound E2∼Ub forming an intermediate (E3∼Ub) that leads to substrate or autoubiquitination. In this way, RBRs resemble HECT E3s, which also form catalytic intermediates in ubiquitination. There are 13 human RBR family E3s. Besides Parkin, two notable RBRs are HOIL-1 and HOIP, which form part of a complex integral to NF-κB activation (Wenzel and Klevit, 2012).In addition to causal roles in AR-JP, single allele mutations of Parkin are found in some sporadic cases of PD (references in Wauer and Komander, 2013). Mutations in the Parkin-associated kinase PINK1, which is upstream of Parkin, also account for a significant number of AR-JP cases (Hardy et al, 2009; Narendra et al, 2012; Lazarou et al, 2013). A number of diverse Parkin substrates have been postulated to be associated with PD. There is substantial evidence that one role for Parkin is at mitochondria. Once activated and recruited to damaged/depolarized mitochondria by PINK1, it ubiquitinates exposed mitochondrial proteins leading to both proteasomal degradation and mitophagy (Narendra et al, 2012; Sarraf et al, 2013). Parkin has also been implicated in cell surface signalling and as a tumour suppressor (see references in Wauer and Komander, 2013).Parkin encodes five structured domains, beginning with an N-terminal ubiquitin-like domain (UbLD) and followed by four domains that each bind two zinc (Zn) atoms (Figure 1A). The most N-terminal of the Zn-binding domains is RING0. C-terminal to this is the RBR, consisting of RING1, the IBR and RING2. The crystal structures of inactive Parkin from Riley et al (2013), Trempe et al (2013) and Wauer and Komander (2013) show remarkable congruity. Spatially, the IBR is at the complete opposite end of the molecule from RING2, to which it is connected by a partially unstructured ∼37 residue linker. This linker includes a two-turn helix, referred to as the repressor element of Parkin (REP) or tether, which binds and occludes the E2 binding face of RING1. RING1 occupies the central position in these structures, and RING0 separates RING1 from RING2 (Figure 1B and C). The latter contains the residue identified by Wenzel et al (2011), and confirmed by all three groups, to be the catalytic cysteine, C431. A lower resolution structure also includes the UbLD and places this domain adjacent to RING1 (Trempe et al, 2013). A second unstructured linker connects the UbLD and RING0. UbLDs are involved in a number of protein–protein interactions and small angle X-ray scattering confirms that this domain is integral to the core structure of Parkin (Spratt et al, 2013; Trempe et al, 2013). Biophysical characterization of Parkin and HHARI suggests that each is a monomer in solution.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Schematic and spatial representation of Parkin. (A) Primary structure and domain designations of Parkin, including the REP sequence within the otherwise unstructured IBR-RING2 linker. (B) Structural representation of full-length Parkin (PDB 4K95) highlighting the complex domain interactions in the three-dimensional structure, the catalytic C431 residue, and residue W403 within the REP, which plays a role in stabilizing the autoinhibited form of Parkin. (C) A model of Parkin with the E2 UbcH5B/Ube2D2 bound (devised using PDB 4K95 and PDB 4AP4 to mimic the position of an E2 bound to RING1) to illustrate the required displacement of UbLD and REP and the large distance between the E2∼Ub attachment site of the E2 and the catalytic active site of Parkin. Note that in this conformation the catalytic Cys within RING2 (C431) remains buried by RING0.RING1 is the only bona fide RING domain. All NMR and crystal structures of IBR domains from Parkin, HHARI and HOIP (PDB ID: 2CT7) are in good agreement. The Parkin and HHARI RING2s are structurally highly homologous and share a common Zn-coordinating arrangement with IBR domains. In contrast to the IBR and RING2, RING0 has a distinct arrangement of Zn-coordinating residues (Beasley et al, 2007; Duda et al, 2013; Riley et al, 2013; Spratt et al, 2013; Trempe et al, 2013; Wauer and Komander, 2013) (see Figure 1F of Trempe et al (2013) for the various Zn coordination arrangements).All of the Parkin crystal structures represent inactive forms of the E3. This is imposed by the quaternary positioning of the domains, which precludes activity in multiple ways. RING0 plays two obvious roles to maintain Parkin in an inactive state. RING0 shares an interface with RING2 and buries C431, making it unavailable as an ubiquitin acceptor. Moreover, RING0 intervenes between RING1 and RING2, creating an insurmountable separation of >50 Å between the active site Cys of an E2 bound to RING1 and C431 (Figure 1B and C). Thus, RING0 must be displaced for ubiquitin transfer to occur. Accordingly, deletion of RING0 results in a marked increase in Parkin autoubiquitination and in C431 reactivity (Riley et al, 2013; Trempe et al, 2013; Wauer and Komander, 2013). In HHARI, these two inhibitory functions are fulfilled by the C-terminal Ariadne domain, which similarly interposes between RING1 and RING2 (Duda et al, 2013).Additional inhibition is provided by the REP, which binds to RING1 at the canonical RING-E2 binding site and prevents E2 binding. This provides at least a partial explanation for the impaired ability of Parkin to bind E2 when compared to HHARI, which lacks this element (Duda et al, 2013). A disease-associated REP mutant (A398T) at the RING1 interface increases autoubiquitination (Wauer and Komander, 2013). The significance of inhibition by REP-RING1 binding was verified by mutating a critical RING1-interacting REP residue (W403A). This increased autoubiquitination and E2 binding (Trempe et al, 2013). Consistent with the requirement for charging C431 with ubiquitin in mitochondrial translocation (Lazarou et al, 2013), Parkin association with depolarized mitochondria is accelerated with this mutation (Trempe et al, 2013). Interestingly, W403 also interacts with the C-terminal Val of Parkin within RING2, and could therefore potentially further stabilize the autoinhibited form of the protein (Riley et al, 2013), consistent with previous observations (Henn et al, 2005).The quaternary structure of full-length Parkin also suggests that displacement of its N-terminal UbLD must occur for full activation (Trempe et al, 2013). The positioning of the UbLD adjacent to RING1 indicates that it would provide a steric impediment to E2∼Ub binding (Figure 1B and C). Additionally, displacement of the UbLD could be important to relieve interactions with the IBR-RING2 linker, which, as suggested in a previous study (Chaugule et al, 2011), might help to maintain Parkin in an inactive state. Finally, the crystal structure of the full-length Parkin indicates that the UbLD is not available for interactions with other proteins. This would limit Parkin''s range of intermolecular interactions.RBR E3s have at least two domains critical for sequential ubiquitin transfer and full activity, RING1 and RING2. The RING1 of Parkin, as well as all other RBR E3s, is notable in lacking the basic residue in the second Zn coordinating loop (or its equivalent in U-box proteins), which has recently been implicated in RING-mediated transfer of Ub from E2∼Ub (Metzger et al, 2013). This suggests that other factors play compensatory roles in positioning ubiquitin for transfer from E2∼Ub to C431. A non-mutually exclusive possibility is that the lack of this basic residue in RING1 limits unwanted attack on the E2∼Ub linkage, thereby minimizing the unregulated ubiquitination. Turning to RING2, the area surrounding the active site C431 of Parkin is notable in that it includes a sequence recognizable as a catalytic triad, similar to that in deubiquitinating enzymes. The Cys-His-Glu grouping, found in Parkin and other RBR E3s, contributes to in vitro activity (Riley et al, 2013; Wauer and Komander, 2013). Interestingly, however, the Glu was dispensable in a cellular assay (Riley et al, 2013). This triad is conserved in HHARI, where an Asn between the Cys and His residues (found in a number of RBRs but not conserved in Parkin), was found to be important for catalysis (Duda et al, 2013).The advances made in these studies impart significant information about an important and clinically relevant E3. However, Parkin, as well as HHARI, has been captured in their inactive, unmodified forms. One obvious question is how does Parkin transition between inactive and active states. PINK1 is implicated in phosphorylating Parkin on its UbLD and potentially other sites, with evidence that phosphorylation contributes to Parkin activation (Narendra et al, 2012). How phosphorylation could contribute to protein interactions that might facilitate Parkin activation, potentially including Parkin oligomerization (Lazarou et al, 2013), is unknown. Regardless, it is evident that considerable unwinding of its quaternary structure must take place.While there is much work ahead to understand these processes, one important interface that must be disrupted for activation is that between the REP and RING1. It is intriguing to consider that such interruption might be associated with other alterations in the IBR-RING2 linker, potentially facilitating the movement of the UbLD from RING1 and contributing to activation. Related to activation is the all-important question of how Parkin recognizes and targets specific substrates. While the UbLD represents a potential site of interaction, most purported substrates are not known to have UbLD-interaction domains. Although interactions involving the UbLD could occur indirectly, through bridging molecules, there is also evidence that other regions of Parkin, including the RBR region, might recognize substrates either directly or indirectly (Tsai et al, 2003) and that some substrates may be phosphorylated by PINK1 (Narendra et al, 2012). Conformational changes induced by substrate interactions, particularly in the IBR RING2 linker, could, as above, represent an important aspect of activation.There are over 75 missense mutations of Parkin associated with AR-JP, most of these inactivate the protein, but there are also some that are activating (Wauer and Komander, 2013). Activating mutations presumably result in pathology at least partially as a consequence of increased autoubiquitination and degradation (e.g., A398T). The current studies help to provide a classification of missense mutations into those that affect (i) folding or stability, (ii) catalytic mechanism, and (iii) interactions between domains. Interdomain mutations might inactivate or contribute to constitutive activation leading to autoubiquitination and degradation.Finally, we know little about how the autosomal recessive and the much more prevalent sporadic forms of PD overlap in their molecular pathology. However, mitochondrial dysfunction is increasingly a common theme. Thus, with the structure of the inactive protein in hand, there is hope that we can begin to consider ways in which domain interactions might be altered in a controlled manner to activate, but not hyperactivate, this critical E3 and lessen the progression of PD.     

Erythropoietin Receptor (EpoR) Agonism Is Used to Treat a Wide Range of Disease

The erythropoietin receptor (EpoR) was discovered and described in red blood cells (RBCs), stimulating its proliferation and survival. The target in humans for EpoR agonists drugs appears clear—to treat anemia. However, there is evidence of the pleitropic actions of erythropoietin (Epo). For that reason, rhEpo therapy was suggested as a reliable approach for treating a broad range of pathologies, including heart and cardiovascular diseases, neurodegenerative disorders (Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease), spinal cord injury, stroke, diabetic retinopathy and rare diseases (Friedreich ataxia). Unfortunately, the side effects of rhEpo are also evident. A new generation of nonhematopoietic EpoR agonists drugs (asialoEpo, Cepo and ARA 290) have been investigated and further developed. These EpoR agonists, without the erythropoietic activity of Epo, while preserving its tissue-protective properties, will provide better outcomes in ongoing clinical trials. Nonhematopoietic EpoR agonists represent safer and more effective surrogates for the treatment of several diseases such as brain and peripheral nerve injury, diabetic complications, renal ischemia, rare diseases, myocardial infarction, chronic heart disease and others.In principle, the erythropoietin receptor (EpoR) was discovered and described in red blood cell (RBC) progenitors, stimulating its proliferation and survival. Erythropoietin (Epo) is mainly synthesized in fetal liver and adult kidneys (1–3). Therefore, it was hypothesized that Epo act exclusively on erythroid progenitor cells. Accordingly, the target in humans for EpoR agonists drugs (such as recombinant erythropoietin [rhEpo], in general, called erythropoiesis-simulating agents) appears clear (that is, to treat anemia). However, evidence of a kaleidoscope of pleitropic actions of Epo has been provided (4,5). The Epo/EpoR axis research involved an initial journey from laboratory basic research to clinical therapeutics. However, as a consequence of clinical observations, basic research on Epo/EpoR comes back to expand its clinical therapeutic applicability.Although kidney and liver have long been considered the major sources of synthesis, Epo mRNA expression has also been detected in the brain (neurons and glial cells), lung, heart, bone marrow, spleen, hair follicles, reproductive tract and osteoblasts (6–17). Accordingly, EpoR was detected in other cells, such as neurons, astrocytes, microglia, immune cells, cancer cell lines, endothelial cells, bone marrow stromal cells and cells of heart, reproductive system, gastrointestinal tract, kidney, pancreas and skeletal muscle (18–27). Conversely, Sinclair et al.(28) reported data questioning the presence or function of EpoR on nonhematopoietic cells (endothelial, neuronal and cardiac cells), suggesting that further studies are needed to confirm the diversity of EpoR. Elliott et al.(29) also showed that EpoR is virtually undetectable in human renal cells and other tissues with no detectable EpoR on cell surfaces. These results have raised doubts about the preclinical basis for studies exploring pleiotropic actions of rhEpo (30).For the above-mentioned data, a return to basic research studies has become necessary, and many studies in animal models have been initiated or have already been performed. The effect of rhEpo administration on angiogenesis, myogenesis, shift in muscle fiber types and oxidative enzyme activities in skeletal muscle (4,31), cardiac muscle mitochondrial biogenesis (32), cognitive effects (31), antiapoptotic and antiinflammatory actions (33–37) and plasma glucose concentrations (38) has been extensively studied. Neuro- and cardioprotection properties have been mainly described. Accordingly, rhEpo therapy was suggested as a reliable approach for treating a broad range of pathologies, including heart and cardiovascular diseases, neurodegenerative disorders (Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease), spinal cord injury, stroke, diabetic retinopathy and rare diseases (Friedreich ataxia).Unfortunately, the side effects of rhEpo are also evident. Epo is involved in regulating tumor angiogenesis (39) and probably in the survival and growth of tumor cells (25,40,41). rhEpo administration also induces serious side effects such as hypertension, polycythemia, myocardial infarction, stroke and seizures, platelet activation and increased thromboembolic risk, and immunogenicity (42–46), with the most common being hypertension (47,48). A new generation of nonhematopoietic EpoR agonists drugs have hence been investigated and further developed in animals models. These compounds, namely asialoerythropoietin (asialoEpo) and carbamylated Epo (Cepo), were developed for preserving tissue-protective properties but reducing the erythropoietic activity of native Epo (49,50). These drugs will provide better outcome in ongoing clinical trials. The advantage of using nonhematopoietic Epo analogs is to avoid the stimulation of hematopoiesis and thereby the prevention of an increased hematocrit with a subsequent procoagulant status or increased blood pressure. In this regard, a new study by van Rijt et al. has shed new light on this topic (51). A new nonhematopoietic EpoR agonist analog named ARA 290 has been developed, promising cytoprotective capacities to prevent renal ischemia/reperfusion injury (51). ARA 290 is a short peptide that has shown no safety concerns in preclinical and human studies. In addition, ARA 290 has proven efficacious in cardiac disorders (52,53), neuropathic pain (54) and sarcoidosis-induced chronic neuropathic pain (55). Thus, ARA 290 is a novel nonhematopoietic EpoR agonist with promising therapeutic options in treating a wide range of pathologies and without increased risks of cardiovascular events.Overall, this new generation of EpoR agonists without the erythropoietic activity of Epo while preserving tissue-protective properties of Epo will provide better outcomes in ongoing clinical trials (49,50). Nonhematopoietic EpoR agonists represent safer and more effective surrogates for the treatment of several diseases, such as brain and peripheral nerve injury, diabetic complications, renal ischemia, rare diseases, myocardial infarction, chronic heart disease and others.     

Calcineurin B-Like Protein-Interacting Protein Kinase CIPK21 Regulates Osmotic and Salt Stress Responses in Arabidopsis

The role of calcium-mediated signaling has been extensively studied in plant responses to abiotic stress signals. Calcineurin B-like proteins (CBLs) and CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs) constitute a complex signaling network acting in diverse plant stress responses. Osmotic stress imposed by soil salinity and drought is a major abiotic stress that impedes plant growth and development and involves calcium-signaling processes. In this study, we report the functional analysis of CIPK21, an Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) CBL-interacting protein kinase, ubiquitously expressed in plant tissues and up-regulated under multiple abiotic stress conditions. The growth of a loss-of-function mutant of CIPK21, cipk21, was hypersensitive to high salt and osmotic stress conditions. The calcium sensors CBL2 and CBL3 were found to physically interact with CIPK21 and target this kinase to the tonoplast. Moreover, preferential localization of CIPK21 to the tonoplast was detected under salt stress condition when coexpressed with CBL2 or CBL3. These findings suggest that CIPK21 mediates responses to salt stress condition in Arabidopsis, at least in part, by regulating ion and water homeostasis across the vacuolar membranes.Drought and salinity cause osmotic stress in plants and severely affect crop productivity throughout the world. Plants respond to osmotic stress by changing a number of cellular processes (Xiong et al., 1999; Xiong and Zhu, 2002; Bartels and Sunkar, 2005; Boudsocq and Lauriére, 2005). Some of these changes include activation of stress-responsive genes, regulation of membrane transport at both plasma membrane (PM) and vacuolar membrane (tonoplast) to maintain water and ionic homeostasis, and metabolic changes to produce compatible osmolytes such as Pro (Stewart and Lee, 1974; Krasensky and Jonak, 2012). It has been well established that a specific calcium (Ca²⁺) signature is generated in response to a particular environmental stimulus (Trewavas and Malhó, 1998; Scrase-Field and Knight, 2003; Luan, 2009; Kudla et al., 2010). The Ca²⁺ changes are primarily perceived by several Ca²⁺ sensors such as calmodulin (Reddy, 2001; Luan et al., 2002), Ca²⁺-dependent protein kinases (Harper and Harmon, 2005), calcineurin B-like proteins (CBLs; Luan et al., 2002; Batistič and Kudla, 2004; Pandey, 2008; Luan, 2009; Sanyal et al., 2015), and other Ca²⁺-binding proteins (Reddy, 2001; Shao et al., 2008) to initiate various cellular responses.Plant CBL-type Ca²⁺ sensors interact with and activate CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs) that phosphorylate downstream components to transduce Ca²⁺ signals (Liu et al., 2000; Luan et al., 2002; Batistič and Kudla, 2004; Luan, 2009). In several plant species, multiple members have been identified in the CBL and CIPK family (Luan et al., 2002; Kolukisaoglu et al., 2004; Pandey, 2008; Batistič and Kudla, 2009; Weinl and Kudla, 2009; Pandey et al., 2014). Involvement of specific CBL-CIPK pair to decode a particular type of signal entails the alternative and selective complex formation leading to stimulus-response coupling (D’Angelo et al., 2006; Batistič et al., 2010).Several CBL and CIPK family members have been implicated in plant responses to drought, salinity, and osmotic stress based on genetic analysis of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) mutants (Zhu, 2002; Cheong et al., 2003, 2007; Kim et al., 2003; Pandey et al., 2004, 2008; D’Angelo et al., 2006; Qin et al., 2008; Tripathi et al., 2009; Held et al., 2011; Tang et al., 2012; Drerup et al., 2013; Eckert et al., 2014). A few CIPKs have also been functionally characterized by gain-of-function approach in crop plants such as rice (Oryza sativa), pea (Pisum sativum), and maize (Zea mays) and were found to be involved in osmotic stress responses (Mahajan et al., 2006; Xiang et al., 2007; Yang et al., 2008; Tripathi et al., 2009; Zhao et al., 2009; Cuéllar et al., 2010).In this report, we examined the role of the Arabidopsis CIPK21 gene in osmotic stress response by reverse genetic analysis. The loss-of-function mutant plants became hypersensitive to salt and mannitol stress conditions, suggesting that CIPK21 is involved in the regulation of osmotic stress response in Arabidopsis. These findings are further supported by an enhanced tonoplast targeting of the cytoplasmic CIPK21 through interaction with the vacuolar Ca²⁺ sensors CBL2 and CBL3 under salt stress condition.     

Characterization of the Possible Roles for B Class MADS Box Genes in Regulation of Perianth Formation in Orchid

To investigate sepal/petal/lip formation in Oncidium Gower Ramsey, three paleoAPETALA3 genes, O. Gower Ramsey MADS box gene5 (OMADS5; clade 1), OMADS3 (clade 2), and OMADS9 (clade 3), and one PISTILLATA gene, OMADS8, were characterized. The OMADS8 and OMADS3 mRNAs were expressed in all four floral organs as well as in vegetative leaves. The OMADS9 mRNA was only strongly detected in petals and lips. The mRNA for OMADS5 was only strongly detected in sepals and petals and was significantly down-regulated in lip-like petals and lip-like sepals of peloric mutant flowers. This result revealed a possible negative role for OMADS5 in regulating lip formation. Yeast two-hybrid analysis indicated that OMADS5 formed homodimers and heterodimers with OMADS3 and OMADS9. OMADS8 only formed heterodimers with OMADS3, whereas OMADS3 and OMADS9 formed homodimers and heterodimers with each other. We proposed that sepal/petal/lip formation needs the presence of OMADS3/8 and/or OMADS9. The determination of the final organ identity for the sepal/petal/lip likely depended on the presence or absence of OMADS5. The presence of OMADS5 caused short sepal/petal formation. When OMADS5 was absent, cells could proliferate, resulting in the possible formation of large lips and the conversion of the sepal/petal into lips in peloric mutants. Further analysis indicated that only ectopic expression of OMADS8 but not OMADS5/9 caused the conversion of the sepal into an expanded petal-like structure in transgenic Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) plants.The ABCDE model predicts the formation of any flower organ by the interaction of five classes of homeotic genes in plants (Yanofsky et al., 1990; Jack et al., 1992; Mandel et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994; Jofuku et al., 1994; Pelaz et al., 2000, 2001; Theißen and Saedler, 2001; Pinyopich et al., 2003; Ditta et al., 2004; Jack, 2004). The A class genes control sepal formation. The A, B, and E class genes work together to regulate petal formation. The B, C, and E class genes control stamen formation. The C and E class genes work to regulate carpel formation, whereas the D class gene is involved in ovule development. MADS box genes seem to have a central role in flower development, because most ABCDE genes encode MADS box proteins (Coen and Meyerowitz, 1991; Weigel and Meyerowitz, 1994; Purugganan et al., 1995; Rounsley et al., 1995; Theißen and Saedler, 1995; Theißen et al., 2000; Theißen, 2001).The function of B group genes, such as APETALA3 (AP3) and PISTILLATA (PI), has been thought to have a major role in specifying petal and stamen development (Jack et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994; Krizek and Meyerowitz, 1996; Kramer et al., 1998; Hernandez-Hernandez et al., 2007; Kanno et al., 2007; Whipple et al., 2007; Irish, 2009). In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), mutation in AP3 or PI caused identical phenotypes of second whorl petal conversion into a sepal structure and third flower whorl stamen into a carpel structure (Bowman et al., 1989; Jack et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994). Similar homeotic conversions for petal and stamen were observed in the mutants of the AP3 and PI orthologs from a number of core eudicots such as Antirrhinum majus, Petunia hybrida, Gerbera hybrida, Solanum lycopersicum, and Nicotiana benthamiana (Sommer et al., 1990; Tröbner et al., 1992; Angenent et al., 1993; van der Krol et al., 1993; Yu et al., 1999; Liu et al., 2004; Vandenbussche et al., 2004; de Martino et al., 2006), from basal eudicot species such as Papaver somniferum and Aquilegia vulgaris (Drea et al., 2007; Kramer et al., 2007), as well as from monocot species such as Zea mays and Oryza sativa (Ambrose et al., 2000; Nagasawa et al., 2003; Prasad and Vijayraghavan, 2003; Yadav et al., 2007; Yao et al., 2008). This indicated that the function of the B class genes AP3 and PI is highly conserved during evolution.It has been thought that B group genes may have arisen from an ancestral gene through multiple gene duplication events (Doyle, 1994; Theißen et al., 1996, 2000; Purugganan, 1997; Kramer et al., 1998; Kramer and Irish, 1999; Lamb and Irish, 2003; Kim et al., 2004; Stellari et al., 2004; Zahn et al., 2005; Hernandez-Hernandez et al., 2007). In the gymnosperms, there was a single putative B class lineage that duplicated to generate the paleoAP3 and PI lineages in angiosperms (Kramer et al., 1998; Theißen et al., 2000; Irish, 2009). The paleoAP3 lineage is composed of AP3 orthologs identified in lower eudicots, magnolid dicots, and monocots (Kramer et al., 1998). Genes in this lineage contain the conserved paleoAP3- and PI-derived motifs in the C-terminal end of the proteins, which have been thought to be characteristics of the B class ancestral gene (Kramer et al., 1998; Tzeng and Yang, 2001; Hsu and Yang, 2002). The PI lineage is composed of PI orthologs that contain a highly conserved PI motif identified in most plant species (Kramer et al., 1998). Subsequently, there was a second duplication at the base of the core eudicots that produced the euAP3 and TM6 lineages, which have been subject to substantial sequence changes in eudicots during evolution (Kramer et al., 1998; Kramer and Irish, 1999). The paleoAP3 motif in the C-terminal end of the proteins was retained in the TM6 lineage and replaced by a conserved euAP3 motif in the euAP3 lineage of most eudicot species (Kramer et al., 1998). In addition, many lineage-specific duplications for paleoAP3 lineage have occurred in plants such as orchids (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009; Mondragón-Palomino et al., 2009), Ranunculaceae, and Ranunculales (Kramer et al., 2003; Di Stilio et al., 2005; Shan et al., 2006; Kramer, 2009).Unlike the A or C class MADS box proteins, which form homodimers that regulate flower development, the ability of B class proteins to form homodimers has only been reported in gymnosperms and in the paleoAP3 and PI lineages of some monocots. For example, LMADS1 of the lily Lilium longiflorum (Tzeng and Yang, 2001), OMADS3 of the orchid Oncidium Gower Ramsey (Hsu and Yang, 2002), and PeMADS4 of the orchid Phalaenopsis equestris (Tsai et al., 2004) in the paleoAP3 lineage, LRGLOA and LRGLOB of the lily Lilium regale (Winter et al., 2002), TGGLO of the tulip Tulipa gesneriana (Kanno et al., 2003), and PeMADS6 of the orchid P. equestris (Tsai et al., 2005) in the PI lineage, and GGM2 of the gymnosperm Gnetum gnemon (Winter et al., 1999) were able to form homodimers that regulate flower development. Proteins in the euAP3 lineage and in most paleoAP3 lineages were not able to form homodimers and had to interact with PI to form heterodimers in order to regulate petal and stamen development in various plant species (Schwarz-Sommer et al., 1992; Tröbner et al., 1992; Riechmann et al., 1996; Moon et al., 1999; Winter et al., 2002; Kanno et al., 2003; Vandenbussche et al., 2004; Yao et al., 2008). In addition to forming dimers, AP3 and PI were able to interact with other MADS box proteins, such as SEPALLATA1 (SEP1), SEP2, and SEP3, to regulate petal and stamen development (Pelaz et al., 2000; Honma and Goto, 2001; Theißen and Saedler, 2001; Castillejo et al., 2005).Orchids are among the most important plants in the flower market around the world, and research on MADS box genes has been reported for several species of orchids during the past few years (Lu et al., 1993, 2007; Yu and Goh, 2000; Hsu and Yang, 2002; Yu et al., 2002; Hsu et al., 2003; Tsai et al., 2004, 2008; Xu et al., 2006; Guo et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2007; Chang et al., 2009). Unlike the flowers in eudicots, the nearly identical shape of the sepals and petals as well as the production of a unique lip in orchid flowers make them a very special plant species for the study of flower development. Four clades (1–4) of genes in the paleoAP3 lineage have been identified in several orchids (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009; Mondragón-Palomino et al., 2009). Several works have described the possible interactions among these four clades of paleoAP3 genes and one PI gene that are involved in regulating the differentiation and formation of the sepal/petal/lip of orchids (Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009). However, the exact mechanism that involves the orchid B class genes remains unclear and needs to be clarified by more experimental investigations.O. Gower Ramsey is a popular orchid with important economic value in cut flower markets. Only a few studies have been reported on the role of MADS box genes in regulating flower formation in this plant species (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Hsu et al., 2003; Chang et al., 2009). An AP3-like MADS gene that regulates both floral formation and initiation in transgenic Arabidopsis has been reported (Hsu and Yang, 2002). In addition, four AP1/AGAMOUS-LIKE9 (AGL9)-like MADS box genes have been characterized that show novel expression patterns and cause different effects on floral transition and formation in Arabidopsis (Hsu et al., 2003; Chang et al., 2009). Compared with other orchids, the production of a large and well-expanded lip and five small identical sepals/petals makes O. Gower Ramsey a special case for the study of the diverse functions of B class MADS box genes during evolution. Therefore, the isolation of more B class MADS box genes and further study of their roles in the regulation of perianth (sepal/petal/lip) formation during O. Gower Ramsey flower development are necessary. In addition to the clade 2 paleoAP3 gene OMADS3, which was previously characterized in our laboratory (Hsu and Yang, 2002), three more B class MADS box genes, OMADS5, OMADS8, and OMADS9, were characterized from O. Gower Ramsey in this study. Based on the different expression patterns and the protein interactions among these four orchid B class genes, we propose that the presence of OMADS3/8 and/or OMADS9 is required for sepal/petal/lip formation. Further sepal and petal formation at least requires the additional presence of OMADS5, whereas large lip formation was seen when OMADS5 expression was absent. Our results provide a new finding and information pertaining to the roles for orchid B class MADS box genes in the regulation of sepal/petal/lip formation.     

PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1 and PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1-RELATED1 Mediate Photorelocation Movements of Both Chloroplasts and Nuclei

Organelle movement and positioning play important roles in fundamental cellular activities and adaptive responses to environmental stress in plants. To optimize photosynthetic light utilization, chloroplasts move toward weak blue light (the accumulation response) and escape from strong blue light (the avoidance response). Nuclei also move in response to strong blue light by utilizing the light-induced movement of attached plastids in leaf cells. Blue light receptor phototropins and several factors for chloroplast photorelocation movement have been identified through molecular genetic analysis of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1 (PMI1) is a plant-specific C2-domain protein that is required for efficient chloroplast photorelocation movement. There are two PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1-RELATED (PMIR) genes, PMIR1 and PMIR2, in the Arabidopsis genome. However, the mechanism in which PMI1 regulates chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements and the involvement of PMIR1 and PMIR2 in these organelle movements remained unknown. Here, we analyzed chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements in mutant lines of PMI1, PMIR1, and PMIR2. In mesophyll cells, the pmi1 single mutant showed severe defects in both chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements resulting from the impaired regulation of chloroplast-actin filaments. In pavement cells, pmi1 mutant plants were partially defective in both plastid and nuclear photorelocation movements, but pmi1pmir1 and pmi1pmir1pmir2 mutant lines lacked the blue light-induced movement responses of plastids and nuclei completely. These results indicated that PMI1 is essential for chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements in mesophyll cells and that both PMI1 and PMIR1 are indispensable for photorelocation movements of plastids and thus, nuclei in pavement cells.In plants, organelles move within the cell and become appropriately positioned to accomplish their functions and adapt to the environment (for review, see Wada and Suetsugu, 2004). Light-induced chloroplast movement (chloroplast photorelocation movement) is one of the best characterized organelle movements in plants (Suetsugu and Wada, 2012). Under weak light conditions, chloroplasts move toward light to capture light efficiently (the accumulation response; Zurzycki, 1955). Under strong light conditions, chloroplasts escape from light to avoid photodamage (the avoidance response; Kasahara et al., 2002; Sztatelman et al., 2010; Davis and Hangarter, 2012; Cazzaniga et al., 2013). In most green plant species, these responses are induced primarily by the blue light receptor phototropin (phot) in response to a range of wavelengths from UVA to blue light (approximately 320–500 nm; for review, see Suetsugu and Wada, 2012; Wada and Suetsugu, 2013; Kong and Wada, 2014). Phot-mediated chloroplast movement has been shown in land plants, such as Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Jarillo et al., 2001; Kagawa et al., 2001; Sakai et al., 2001), the fern Adiantum capillus-veneris (Kagawa et al., 2004), the moss Physcomitrella patens (Kasahara et al., 2004), and the liverwort Marchantia polymorpha (Komatsu et al., 2014). Two phots in Arabidopsis, phot1 and phot2, redundantly mediate the accumulation response (Sakai et al., 2001), whereas phot2 primarily regulates the avoidance response (Jarillo et al., 2001; Kagawa et al., 2001; Luesse et al., 2010). M. polymorpha has only one phot that mediates both the accumulation and avoidance responses (Komatsu et al., 2014), although two or more phots mediate chloroplast photorelocation movement in A. capillus-veneris (Kagawa et al., 2004) and P. patens (Kasahara et al., 2004). Thus, duplication and functional diversification of PHOT genes have occurred during land plant evolution, and plants have gained a sophisticated light sensing system for chloroplast photorelocation movement.In general, movements of plant organelles, including chloroplasts, are dependent on actin filaments (for review, see Wada and Suetsugu, 2004). Most organelles common in eukaryotes, such as mitochondria, peroxisomes, and Golgi bodies, use the myosin motor for their movements, but there is no clear evidence that chloroplast movement is myosin dependent (for review, see Suetsugu et al., 2010a). Land plants have innovated a novel actin-based motility system that is specialized for chloroplast movement as well as a photoreceptor system (for review, see Suetsugu et al., 2010a; Wada and Suetsugu, 2013; Kong and Wada, 2014). Chloroplast-actin (cp-actin) filaments, which were first found in Arabidopsis, are short actin filaments specifically localized around the chloroplast periphery at the interface between the chloroplast and the plasma membrane (Kadota et al., 2009). Strong blue light induces the rapid disappearance of cp-actin filaments and then, their subsequent reappearance preferentially at the front region of the moving chloroplasts. This asymmetric distribution of cp-actin filaments is essential for directional chloroplast movement (Kadota et al., 2009; Kong et al., 2013a). The greater the difference in the amount of cp-actin filaments between the front and rear regions of chloroplasts becomes, the faster the chloroplasts move, in which the magnitude of the difference is determined by fluence rate (Kagawa and Wada, 2004; Kadota et al., 2009; Kong et al., 2013a). Strong blue light-induced disappearance of cp-actin filaments is regulated in a phot2-dependent manner before the intensive polymerization of cp-actin filaments at the front region occurs (Kadota et al., 2009; Ichikawa et al., 2011; Kong et al., 2013a). This phot2-dependent response contributes to the greater difference in the amount of cp-actin filaments between the front and rear regions of chloroplasts. Similar behavior of cp-actin filaments has also been observed in A. capillus-veneris (Tsuboi and Wada, 2012) and P. patens (Yamashita et al., 2011).Like chloroplasts, nuclei also show light-mediated movement and positioning (nuclear photorelocation movement) in land plants (for review, see Higa et al., 2014b). In gametophytic cells of A. capillus-veneris, weak light induced the accumulation responses of both chloroplasts and nuclei, whereas strong light induced avoidance responses (Kagawa and Wada, 1993, 1995; Tsuboi et al., 2007). However, in mesophyll cells of Arabidopsis, strong blue light induced both chloroplast and nuclear avoidance responses, but weak blue light induced only the chloroplast accumulation response (Iwabuchi et al., 2007, 2010; Higa et al., 2014a). In Arabidopsis pavement cells, small numbers of tiny plastids were found and showed autofluorescence under the confocal laser-scanning microscopy (Iwabuchi et al., 2010; Higa et al., 2014a). Hereafter, the plastid in the pavement cells is called the pavement cell plastid. Strong blue light-induced avoidance responses of pavement cell plastids and nuclei were induced in a phot2-dependent manner, but the accumulation response was not detected for either organelle (Iwabuchi et al., 2007, 2010; Higa et al., 2014a). In both Arabidopsis and A. capillus-veneris, phots mediate nuclear photorelocation movement, and phot2 mediates the nuclear avoidance response (Iwabuchi et al., 2007, 2010; Tsuboi et al., 2007). The nuclear avoidance response is dependent on actin filaments in both mesophyll and pavement cells of Arabidopsis (Iwabuchi et al., 2010). Recently, it was shown that the nuclear avoidance response relies on cp-actin-dependent movement of pavement cell plastids, where nuclei are associated with pavement cell plastids of Arabidopsis (Higa et al., 2014a). In mesophyll cells, nuclear avoidance response is likely dependent on cp-actin filament-mediated chloroplast movement, because the mutants deficient in chloroplast movement were also defective in nuclear avoidance response (Higa et al., 2014a). Thus, phots mediate both chloroplast (and pavement cell plastid) and nuclear photorelocation movement by regulating cp-actin filaments.Molecular genetic analyses of Arabidopsis mutants deficient in chloroplast photorelocation movement have identified many molecular factors involved in signal transduction and/or motility systems as well as those involved in the photoreceptor system for chloroplast photorelocation movement (and thus, nuclear photorelocation movement; for review, see Suetsugu and Wada, 2012; Wada and Suetsugu, 2013; Kong and Wada, 2014). CHLOROPLAST UNUSUAL POSITIONING1 (CHUP1; Oikawa et al., 2003) and KINESIN-LIKE PROTEIN FOR ACTIN-BASED CHLOROPLAST MOVEMENT (KAC; Suetsugu et al., 2010b) are key factors for generating and/or maintaining cp-actin filaments. Both proteins are highly conserved in land plants and essential for the movement and attachment of chloroplasts to the plasma membrane in Arabidopsis (Oikawa et al., 2003, 2008; Suetsugu et al., 2010b), A. capillus-veneris (Suetsugu et al., 2012), and P. patens (Suetsugu et al., 2012; Usami et al., 2012). CHUP1 is localized on the chloroplast outer membrane and binds to globular and filamentous actins and profilin in vitro (Oikawa et al., 2003, 2008; Schmidt von Braun and Schleiff, 2008). Although KAC is a kinesin-like protein, it lacks microtubule-dependent motor activity but has filamentous actin binding activity (Suetsugu et al., 2010b). An actin-bundling protein THRUMIN1 (THRUM1) is required for efficient chloroplast photorelocation movement (Whippo et al., 2011) and interacts with cp-actin filaments (Kong et al., 2013a). chup1 and kac mutant plants were shown to lack detectable cp-actin filaments (Kadota et al., 2009; Suetsugu et al., 2010b; Ichikawa et al., 2011; Kong et al., 2013a). Similarly, cp-actin filaments were rarely detected in thrum1 mutant plants (Kong et al., 2013a), indicating that THRUM1 also plays an important role in maintaining cp-actin filaments.Other proteins J-DOMAIN PROTEIN REQUIRED FOR CHLOROPLAST ACCUMULATION RESPONSE1 (JAC1; Suetsugu et al., 2005), WEAK CHLOROPLAST MOVEMENT UNDER BLUE LIGHT1 (WEB1; Kodama et al., 2010), and PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED2 (PMI2; Luesse et al., 2006; Kodama et al., 2010) are involved in the light regulation of cp-actin filaments and chloroplast photorelocation movement. JAC1 is an auxilin-like J-domain protein that mediates the chloroplast accumulation response through its J-domain function (Suetsugu et al., 2005; Takano et al., 2010). WEB1 and PMI2 are coiled-coil proteins that interact with each other (Kodama et al., 2010). Although web1 and pmi2 were partially defective in the avoidance response, the jac1 mutation completely suppressed the phenotype of web1 and pmi2, suggesting that the WEB1/PMI2 complex suppresses JAC1 function (i.e. the accumulation response) under strong light conditions (Kodama et al., 2010). Both web1 and pmi2 showed impaired disappearance of cp-actin filaments in response to strong blue light (Kodama et al., 2010). However, the exact molecular functions of these proteins are unknown.In this study, we characterized mutant plants deficient in the PMI1 gene and two homologous genes PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1-RELATED1 (PMIR1) and PMIR2. PMI1 was identified through molecular genetic analyses of pmi1 mutants that showed severe defects in chloroplast accumulation and avoidance responses (DeBlasio et al., 2005). PMI1 is a plant-specific C2-domain protein (DeBlasio et al., 2005; Zhang and Aravind, 2010), but its roles and those of PMIRs in cp-actin-mediated chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements remained unclear. Thus, we analyzed chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements in the single, double, and triple mutants of pmi1, pmir1, and pmir2.