Acidic Di-leucine Motif Essential for AP-3–dependent Sorting and Restriction of the Functional Specificity of the Vam3p Vacuolar t-SNARE

The transport of newly synthesized proteins through the vacuolar protein sorting pathway in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae requires two distinct target SNAP receptor (t-SNARE) proteins, Pep12p and Vam3p. Pep12p is localized to the pre-vacuolar endosome and its activity is required for transport of proteins from the Golgi to the vacuole through a well defined route, the carboxypeptidase Y (CPY) pathway. Vam3p is localized to the vacuole where it mediates delivery of cargoes from both the CPY and the recently described alkaline phosphatase (ALP) pathways. Surprisingly, despite their organelle-specific functions in sorting of vacuolar proteins, overexpression of VAM3 can suppress the protein sorting defects of pep12Δ cells. Based on this observation, we developed a genetic screen to identify domains in Vam3p (e.g., localization and/or specific protein–protein interaction domains) that allow it to efficiently substitute for Pep12p. Using this screen, we identified mutations in a 7–amino acid sequence in Vam3p that lead to missorting of Vam3p from the ALP pathway into the CPY pathway where it can substitute for Pep12p at the pre-vacuolar endosome. This region contains an acidic di-leucine sequence that is closely related to sorting signals required for AP-3 adaptor–dependent transport in both yeast and mammalian systems. Furthermore, disruption of AP-3 function also results in the ability of wild-type Vam3p to compensate for pep12 mutants, suggesting that AP-3 mediates the sorting of Vam3p via the di-leucine signal. Together, these data provide the first identification of an adaptor protein–specific sorting signal in a t-SNARE protein, and suggest that AP-3–dependent sorting of Vam3p acts to restrict its interaction with compartment-specific accessory proteins, thereby regulating its function. Regulated transport of cargoes such as Vam3p through the AP-3–dependent pathway may play an important role in maintaining the unique composition, function, and morphology of the vacuole.     

Direct Interaction of 14-3-3ζ with Ezrin Promotes Cell Migration by Regulating the Formation of Membrane Ruffle

14-3-3 proteins have been shown to regulate the actin cytoskeleton remodeling, cell adhesion and migration. In this study, we identified ezrin, a cross-linker between plasma membrane and actin cytoskeleton, as a novel 14-3-3ζ interacting partner. The direct interaction between 14-3-3ζ and ezrin was validated in the cells and by in vitro assays. We showed that the 14-3-3ζ binding region in ezrin was located within the N-terminal and central α-helical domains and that the αG-to-αI helices of 14-3-3ζ are responsible for the binding to ezrin. Functional analyses revealed that the regulation of cell migration and membrane ruffling by 14-3-3ζ is ezrin dependent, for which the integrity of ezrin protein was required. Conversely, the knockdown of 14-3-3ζ abrogates also the stimulatory effect of ezrin on cell migration and membrane ruffling. Moreover, we found that the phosphorylation of Thr567 in ezrin facilitates the 14-3-3ζ–ezrin interaction and the formation of membrane ruffles. Taken together, these results suggest strongly that the functions of these two proteins in cell migration are linked and might be mediated by their direct physical interaction, which is important for the formation of membrane ruffles.     

Structural and Functional Analysis of E. coli Cyclopropane Fatty Acid Synthase

1. Download high-res image (198KB)
2. Download full-size image

     

Probing the Role of Sigma π Interaction and Energetics in the Catalytic Efficiency of Endo-1,4-β-Xylanase

Chaetomium globosum endo-1,4-β-xylanase (XylCg) is distinguished from other xylanases by its high turnover rate (1,860 s⁻¹), the highest ever reported for fungal xylanases. One conserved amino acid, W48, in the substrate binding pocket of wild-type XylCg was identified as an important residue affecting XylCg''s catalytic efficiency.     

Role of Molecular Chaperones in G Protein ��5/Regulator of G Protein Signaling Dimer Assembly and G Protein �¦� Dimer Specificity

The G protein βγ subunit dimer (Gβγ) and the Gβ5/regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) dimer play fundamental roles in propagating and regulating G protein pathways, respectively. How these complexes form dimers when the individual subunits are unstable is a question that has remained unaddressed for many years. In the case of Gβγ, recent studies have shown that phosducin-like protein 1 (PhLP1) works as a co-chaperone with the cytosolic chaperonin complex (CCT) to fold Gβ and mediate its interaction with Gγ. However, it is not known what fraction of the many Gβγ combinations is assembled this way or whether chaperones influence the specificity of Gβγ dimer formation. Moreover, the mechanism of Gβ5-RGS assembly has yet to be assessed experimentally. The current study was undertaken to directly address these issues. The data show that PhLP1 plays a vital role in the assembly of Gγ2 with all four Gβ1–4 subunits and in the assembly of Gβ2 with all twelve Gγ subunits, without affecting the specificity of the Gβγ interactions. The results also show that Gβ5-RGS7 assembly is dependent on CCT and PhLP1, but the apparent mechanism is different from that of Gβγ. PhLP1 seems to stabilize the interaction of Gβ5 with CCT until Gβ5 is folded, after which it is released to allow Gβ5 to interact with RGS7. These findings point to a general role for PhLP1 in the assembly of all Gβγ combinations and suggest a CCT-dependent mechanism for Gβ5-RGS7 assembly that utilizes the co-chaperone activity of PhLP1 in a unique way.Eukaryotic cells utilize receptors coupled to heterotrimeric GTP-binding proteins (G proteins)³ to mediate a vast array of responses ranging from nutrient-induced migration of single-celled organisms to neurotransmitter-regulated neuronal activity in the human brain (1). Ligand binding to a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) initiates GTP exchange on the G protein heterotrimer (composed of Gα, Gβ, and Gγ subunits), which in turn causes the release of Gα-GTP from the Gβγ dimer (2–4). Both Gα-GTP and Gβγ propagate and amplify the signal by interacting with effector enzymes and ion channels (1, 5). The duration and amplitude of the signal is dictated by receptor phosphorylation coupled with arrestin binding and internalization (6) and by regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, which serve as GTPase-activating proteins for the GTP-bound Gα subunit (7, 8). The G protein signaling cycle is reset as the inactive Gα-GDP reassembles with the Gβγ dimer and Gαβγ re-associates with the GPCR (5).To fulfill its essential role in signaling, the G protein heterotrimer must be assembled post-translationally from its nascent polypeptides. Significant progress has been made recently regarding the mechanism by which this process occurs. It has been clear for some time that the Gβγ dimer must assemble first, followed by subsequent association of Gα with Gβγ (9). What has not been clear was how Gβγ assembly would occur given the fact that neither Gβ nor Gγ is structurally stable without the other. An important breakthrough was the finding that phosducin-like protein 1 (PhLP1) functions as a co-chaperone with the chaperonin containing tailless complex polypeptide 1 (CCT) in the folding of nascent Gβ and its association with Gγ (10–15). CCT is an important chaperone that assists in the folding of actin and tubulin and many other cytosolic proteins, including many β propeller proteins like Gβ (16). PhLP1 has been known for some time to interact with Gβγ and was initially believed to inhibit Gβγ function (17). However, several recent studies have demonstrated that PhLP1 and CCT work together in a highly orchestrated manner to form the Gβγ dimer (10–15).Studies on the mechanism of PhLP1-mediated Gβγ assembly have focused on the most common dimer Gβ1γ2 (10, 13, 14), leaving open questions about the role of PhLP1 in the assembly of the other Gβγ combinations. These are important considerations given that humans possess 5 Gβ genes and 12 Gγ genes with some important splice variants (18, 19), resulting in more than 60 possible combinations of Gβγ dimers. Gβ1–4 share between 80 and 90% sequence identity and are broadly expressed (18, 19). Gβ5, the more atypical isoform, shares only ∼53% identity with Gβ1, carries a longer N-terminal domain, and is only expressed in the central nervous system and retina (20). The Gγ protein family is more heterogeneous than the Gβ family. The sequence identity of the 12 Gγ isoforms extends from 10 to 70% (21), and the Gγ family can be separated into 5 subfamilies (21–23). All Gγ proteins carry C-terminal isoprenyl modifications, which contribute to their association with the cell membrane, GPCRs, Gαs, and effectors (9). Subfamily I Gγ isoforms are post-translationally farnesylated, whereas all others are geranylgeranylated (22, 24).There is some inherent selectivity in the assembly of different Gβγ combinations, but in general Gβ1–4 can form dimers with most Gγ subunits (25). The physiological purpose of this large number of Gβγ combinations has intrigued researchers in the field for many years, and a large body of research indicates that GPCRs and effectors couple to a preferred subset of Gβγ combinations based somewhat on specific sequence complementarity, but even more so on cellular expression patterns, subcellular localization, and post-translational modifications (18).In contrast to Gβ1–4, Gβ5 does not interact with Gγ subunits in vivo, but it instead forms irreversible dimers with RGS proteins of the R7 family, which includes RGS proteins 6, 7, 9, and 11 (26). All R7 family proteins contain an N-terminal DEP (disheveled, Egl-10, pleckstrin) domain, a central Gγ-like (GGL) domain, and a C-terminal RGS domain (8, 26). The DEP domain interacts with the membrane anchoring/nuclear shuttling R7-binding protein, and the GGL domain binds to Gβ5 in a manner similar to other Gβγ associations (27, 28). Like Gβγs, Gβ5 and R7 RGS proteins form obligate dimers required for their mutual stability (26). Without their partner, Gβ5 and R7 RGS proteins are rapidly degraded in cells (26, 29). Gβ5-R7 RGS complexes act as important GTPase-accelerating proteins for G_i/oα and G_qα subunits in neuronal cells and some immune cells (26).It has been recently shown that all Gβ isoforms are able to interact with the CCT complex, but to varying degrees (15). Gβ4 and Gβ1 bind CCT better than Gβ2 and Gβ3, whereas Gβ5 binds CCT poorly (15). These results suggest that Gβ1 and Gβ4 might be more dependent on PhLP1 than the other Gβs, given the co-chaperone role of PhLP1 with CCT in Gβ1γ2 assembly. However, another report has indicated that Gγ2 assembly with Gβ1 and Gβ2 is more PhLP1-dependent than with Gβ3 and Gβ4 (30). Thus, it is not clear from current information whether PhLP1 and CCT participate in assembly of all Gβγ combinations or whether they contribute to the specificity of Gβγ dimer formation, nor is it clear whether they or other chaperones are involved in Gβ5-R7 RGS dimer formation. This report was designed to address these issues.     

Structural and Functional Integration of the PLCγ Interaction Domains Critical for Regulatory Mechanisms and Signaling Deregulation

1. Download : Download high-res image (312KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

Highlights? Domains from PLCγ regulatory region show structural and functional integration ? Only cSH2 domain interacts with the PLC-core forming a high affinity surface ? Activation involves removal of autoinhibition and dissociation from the receptor ? Disease-linked mutations map to the autoinhibitory interface     

Structural–Functional Domains of the Eukaryotic Genome

It is well known that DNA folding in the eukaryotic cell nucleus is tightly coupled with the operation of epigenetic mechanisms defining the repertoires of the genes expressed in different types of cells. To understand these mechanisms, it is important to know how DNA is packaged in chromatin. About 30 years ago a hypothesis was formulated, according to which epigenetic mechanisms operate not at the level of individual genes, but rather groups of genes localized in structurally and functionally isolated genomic segments that were called structural and functional domains. The question of what exactly these domains constitute has been re-examined multiple times as our knowledge of principles of chromatin folding has changed. In this review, we discuss structural and functional genomic domains in light of the current model of interphase chromosome organization based on the results of analysis of spatial proximity between remote genomic elements.     

A Measure of the Broad Substrate Specificity of Enzymes Based on ‘Duplicate’ Catalytic Residues

The ability of an enzyme to select and act upon a specific class of compounds with unerring precision and efficiency is an essential feature of life. Simultaneously, these enzymes often catalyze the reaction of a range of similar substrates of the same class, and also have promiscuous activities on unrelated substrates. Previously, we have established a methodology to quantify promiscuous activities in a wide range of proteins. In the current work, we quantitatively characterize the active site for the ability to catalyze distinct, yet related, substrates (BRASS). A protein with known structure and active site residues provides the framework for computing ‘duplicate’ residues, each of which results in slightly modified replicas of the active site scaffold. Such spatial congruence is supplemented by Finite difference Poisson Boltzmann analysis which filters out electrostatically unfavorable configurations. The congruent configurations are used to compute an index (BrassIndex), which reflects the broad substrate profile of the active site. We identify an acetylhydrolase and a methyltransferase as having the lowest and highest BrassIndex, respectively, from a set of non-homologous proteins extracted from the Catalytic Site Atlas. The acetylhydrolase, a regulatory enzyme, is known to be highly specific for platelet-activating factor. In the methyltransferase (PDB: 1QAM), various combinations of glycine (Gly38/40/42), asparagine (Asn101/11) and glutamic acid (Glu59/36) residues having similar spatial and electrostatic profiles with the specified scaffold (Gly38, Asn101 and Glu59) exemplifies the broad substrate profile such an active site may provide. ‘Duplicate’ residues identified by relaxing the spatial and/or electrostatic constraints can be the target of directed evolution methodologies, like saturation mutagenesis, for modulating the substrate specificity of proteins.     

Biophysical Analysis of Bacterial CTP Synthase Filaments Formed in the Presence of the Chemotherapeutic Metabolite Gemcitabine-5′-triphosphate

While enzyme activity is often regulated by a combination of substrate/effector availability and quaternary structure, many cytosolic enzymes may be further regulated through oligomerization into filaments. Cytidine-5′-triphosphate (CTP) synthase (CTPS) forms such filaments—a process that is promoted by the product CTP. The CTP analog and active chemotherapeutic metabolite gemcitabine-5′-triphosphate (dF-dCTP) is a potent inhibitor of CTPS; however, its effect on the enzyme's ability to form filaments is unknown. Alongside electron microscopy studies, dynamic light scattering showed that dF-dCTP induces Escherichia coli CTPS (EcCTPS) to form filaments in solution with lengths ≥ 30 nm in the presence of CTP or dF-dCTP. The substrate UTP blocks formation of filaments and effects their disassembly. EcCTPS variants were constructed to investigate the role of CTP-binding determinants in CTP- and dF-dCTP-dependent filament formation. Substitution of Glu 149 (i.e., E149D), which interacts with the ribose of CTP, caused reduced affinity for both CTP and dF-dCTP, and obviated filament formation. Phe 227 appears to interact with CTP through an edge-on interaction with the cytosine ring, yet the F227A and F227L variants bound CTP and dF-dCTP. F227A EcCTPS did not form filaments, while F227L EcCTPS formed shorter filaments in the presence of CTP or dF-dCTP. Hence, Phe 227 plays a role in filament formation, although replacement by a bulky hydrophobic amino acid is sufficient for limited filament formation. That dF-dCTP can induce filament formation highlights the fact that nucleotide analogs employed as chemotherapeutic agents may affect the filamentous states of enzymes and potentially alter their regulation in vivo.     

Glycosylation of Skp1 Promotes Formation of Skp1–Cullin-1–F-box Protein Complexes in Dictyostelium

O₂ sensing in diverse protozoa depends on the prolyl 4 hydroxylation of Skp1 and modification of the resulting hydroxyproline with a series of five sugars. In yeast, plants, and animals, Skp1 is associated with F-box proteins. The Skp1–F-box protein heterodimer can, for many F-box proteins, dock onto cullin-1 en route to assembly of the Skp1–cullin-1–F-box protein–Rbx1 subcomplex of E3^SCFUb ligases. E3^SCFUb ligases conjugate Lys48-polyubiquitin chains onto targets bound to the substrate receptor domains of F-box proteins, preparing them for recognition by the 26S proteasome. In the social amoeba Dictyostelium, we found that O₂ availability was rate-limiting for the hydroxylation of newly synthesized Skp1. To investigate the effect of reduced hydroxylation, we analyzed knockout mutants of the Skp1 prolyl hydroxylase and each of the Skp1 glycosyltransferases. Proteomic analysis of co-immunoprecipitates showed that wild-type cells able to fully glycosylate Skp1 had a greater abundance of an SCF complex containing the cullin-1 homolog CulE and FbxD, a newly described WD40-type F-box protein, than the complexes that predominate in cells defective in Skp1 hydroxylation or glycosylation. Similarly, the previously described FbxA–Skp1CulA complex was also more abundant in glycosylation-competent cells. The CulE interactome also included higher levels of proteasomal regulatory particles when Skp1 was glycosylated, suggesting increased activity consistent with greater association with F-box proteins. Finally, the interactome of FLAG-FbxD was modified when it harbored an F-box mutation that compromised Skp1 binding, consistent with an effect on the abundance of potential substrate proteins. We propose that O₂-dependent posttranslational glycosylation of Skp1 promotes association with F-box proteins and their engagement in functional E3^SCFUb ligases that regulate O₂-dependent developmental progression.Timely protein degradation is a cornerstone of cell cycling and the regulation of numerous physiological and developmental processes. Eukaryotes have evolved an extensive array of polyubiquitination enzymes to tag proteins on a protein-by-protein basis as a recognition marker for degradation in the 26S proteasome. The cullin-RING ubiquitin ligases (CRLs)¹ are a prominent subgroup of these enzymes (1) and consist of an E3 architecture that includes a substrate receptor, an adaptor (in most cases), the cullin scaffold, the RING protein, and an exchangeable E2 ubiquitin donor that has been charged with ubiquitin (Ub) by an E1 enzyme. The first discovered and still prototypic example is the CRL1 class (2), also referred to as SCF on account of the names of its founding subunits, Skp1, cullin-1, and F-box proteins (FBPs). The CRL1 (or SCF) complexes utilize FBPs as substrate receptors, Skp1 as the adaptor linking the FBP to the N-terminal region of cullin-1 (Cul1), and Rbx1 as the RING protein that tethers the E2 Ub donor to the Cul1 C-terminal region (see Fig. 2B). CRL1s can be activated by neddylation of Cul1 by a Nedd8-specific E2, which mobilizes Rbx1 to afford rotational flexibility of the E2 and displaces the inhibitor Cand1, permitting docking of the Skp1–FBP heterodimer (3–5). Deneddylation mediated by the eight-subunit COP9 signalosome is required for in vivo activity, suggesting that Cand1 serves as a substrate exchange factor to allow for re-equilibration of SCF complexes from preexisting subunits. Each reaction cycle requires the exchange of a new E2-Ub and typically assembles a K48-linked polyUb chain that is recognized by the proteasome. Substrate specificity is conferred by FBPs, a gene family that numbers 69 in humans, 20 in budding yeast, 300 in Caenorhabditis elegans, and ∼800 in Arabidopsis. Some characterized FBPs can recognize perhaps a dozen or more substrates, and the coding of recognition and the meaning of their control by the same FBP is under intense investigation (6). Recognition is often activated by posttranslational modification of the substrate (often phosphorylation). Regulation of SCF Ub ligases has centered on the neddylation cycle, which potentially influences all seven known CRLs. Regulation of Skp1, investigated in this paper, would be specific to CRLs possessing Skp1, which include CRL1 and possibly the minor class CRL7 (7).Open in a separate windowFig. 2.Skp1 modification pathway and global analysis of Skp1 interactions. A, Skp1 is sequentially modified by the indicated enzymes (in blue), resulting in the formation of a pentasaccharide at Pro143. B, model of the SCF complex in the context of the overall E3 Ub ligase, from studies in yeast, plants, and animals. Catalysis involves transfer of Ub from an exchangeable Ub-E2 conjugate to the substrate. Removal of Nedd8 by the COP9 signalosome facilitates binding of Cand1 to Cul1, which inhibits binding of Skp1 to Cul1. C, D, vegetative (growth stage) cells were filter-lysed, and a cytosolic fraction prepared via ultracentrifugation was chromatographed on a Superose 12 gel filtration column. Fractions were analyzed via Western blotting (representative examples are shown in C) followed by densitometry (D). The elution position of free Skp1 from a separate trial is indicated.The basic SCF model is thought to be widespread among eukaryotes but has been extensively studied only in fungi/yeasts, plants, and animals. The broad phylogeny represented by protists includes many benign and pathogenic unicellular organisms of great economic, health, and environmental impact. Emerging evidence reveals that Skp1 in some of these groups is subject to a novel form of prolyl 4(trans)-hydroxylation and complex glycosylation (8). The roles of these Skp1 modifications have been most studied in the social amoeba Dictyostelium, which undergoes a starvation-induced developmental program during which individual amoebae chemotactically aggregate into an initial mound that then elongates into a migratory slug. Under appropriate conditions, the slug reorganizes to form a fruiting body consisting of a ball of spores supported by a vertical cellular stalk. The slug-to-fruit switch, referred to as culmination, and sporulation are regulated by checkpoints that are sensitive to multiple factors, including O₂ (9–11). Functional studies of Dictyostelium Skp1 hydroxylation and glycosylation reveal roles in regulating the O₂ dependence of culmination and sporulation (12–14). For example, wild-type (wt) cells require 7% to 10% O₂ and phyA^– requires 18% to 21% O₂ in order to achieve 50% spore formation (a quantitative measure of fruiting body formation), whereas glycosylation mutants exhibit a complex pattern of intermediate requirements (13). In addition, at 21% O₂, phyA^– cells require an additional 3 to 4 h to complete development relative to their wt counterparts (14). In the apicomplexan Toxoplasma gondii, PhyA is also required for Skp1 glycosylation, and phyA^– parasites are deficient in proliferation, especially at low O₂ (15).The idea that O₂ availability is rate limiting for Skp1 modification was originally based on the observation that the Dictyostelium phyA^– phenotype mimics that of wt cells in low O₂ (9). However, the majority of Skp1 is hydroxylated and glycosylated in wt cells even at low O₂ levels where culmination is blocked or delayed. Further analysis of a submerged development model, in which terminal development depended on an atmosphere of 70% to 100% O₂ in order to overcome the diffusion barrier posed by the water layer, showed that at atmospheric O₂ levels of 5% to 21% where sporulation was blocked, unmodified Skp1 accumulated to a higher level than at permissive O₂ levels (10). As Skp1 modifications are thought to be irreversible, this likely resulted from slow hydroxylation of newly synthesized Skp1. To address this in a more physiological setting, we investigated nascent Skp1 directly using metabolic labeling with [³⁵S]Met/Cys and verified that the rate of hydroxylation of newly synthesized Skp1 polypeptide was indeed inversely proportional to O₂ levels, which makes PhyA-mediated hydroxylation of Skp1 an excellent candidate for the primary O₂ sensor for culmination.These modifications of Skp1 are of interest as a novel mechanism regulating the SCF ligase. Previously, we showed that hydroxylation and glycosylation of Dictyostelium Skp1 affect its conformation and promote binding to a soluble FBP, guinea pig Fbs1, in studies of purified proteins (16). Here we show that Dictyostelium Skp1 is indeed a subunit of a canonical SCF complex, as expected. The significance of undermodified Skp1 was examined via interactome analysis of Skp1 isoforms that accumulate in modification pathway mutants. Our findings revealed a lower abundance of SCF complexes than in wt cells, suggesting that Skp1 modification may promote SCF assembly and E3^SCFUb ligase activities that control timely turnover of select proteins involved in developmental progression.     

Structural Basis and Catalytic Mechanism for the Dual Functional Endo-β-N-Acetylglucosaminidase A

Endo-β-N-acetylglucosaminidases (ENGases) are dual specificity enzymes with an ability to catalyze hydrolysis and transglycosylation reactions. Recently, these enzymes have become the focus of intense research because of their potential for synthesis of glycopeptides. We have determined the 3D structures of an ENGase from Arthrobacter protophormiae (Endo-A) in 3 forms, one in native form, one in complex with Man₃GlcNAc-thiazoline and another in complex with GlcNAc-Asn. The carbohydrate moiety sits above the TIM-barrel in a cleft region surrounded by aromatic residues. The conserved essential catalytic residues – E173, N171 and Y205 are within hydrogen bonding distance of the substrate. W216 and W244 regulate access to the active site during transglycosylation by serving as “gate-keepers”. Interestingly, Y299F mutation resulted in a 3 fold increase in the transglycosylation activity. The structure provides insights into the catalytic mechanism of GH85 family of glycoside hydrolases at molecular level and could assist rational engineering of ENGases.     

Mechanisms of Blood Brain Barrier Disruption by Different Types of Bacteria,and Bacterial–Host Interactions Facilitate the Bacterial Pathogen Invading the Brain

This review aims to elucidate the different mechanisms of blood brain barrier (BBB) disruption that may occur due to invasion by different types of bacteria, as well as to show the bacteria–host interactions that assist the bacterial pathogen in invading the brain. For example, platelet-activating factor receptor (PAFR) is responsible for brain invasion during the adhesion of pneumococci to brain endothelial cells, which might lead to brain invasion. Additionally, the major adhesin of the pneumococcal pilus-1, RrgA is able to bind the BBB endothelial receptors: polymeric immunoglobulin receptor (pIgR) and platelet endothelial cell adhesion molecule (PECAM-1), thus leading to invasion of the brain. Moreover, Streptococcus pneumoniae choline binding protein A (CbpA) targets the common carboxy-terminal domain of the laminin receptor (LR) establishing initial contact with brain endothelium that might result in BBB invasion. Furthermore, BBB disruption may occur by S. pneumoniae penetration through increasing in pro-inflammatory markers and endothelial permeability. In contrast, adhesion, invasion, and translocation through or between endothelial cells can be done by S. pneumoniae without any disruption to the vascular endothelium, upon BBB penetration. Internalins (InlA and InlB) of Listeria monocytogenes interact with its cellular receptors E-cadherin and mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) to facilitate invading the brain. L. monocytogenes species activate NF-κB in endothelial cells, encouraging the expression of P- and E-selectin, intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1), and Vascular cell adhesion protein 1 (VCAM-1), as well as IL-6 and IL-8 and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), all these markers assist in BBB disruption. Bacillus anthracis species interrupt both adherens junctions (AJs) and tight junctions (TJs), leading to BBB disruption. Brain microvascular endothelial cells (BMECs) permeability and BBB disruption are induced via interendothelial junction proteins reduction as well as up-regulation of IL-1α, IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α, MCP-1, macrophage inflammatory proteins-1 alpha (MIP1α) markers in Staphylococcus aureus species. Streptococcus agalactiae or Group B Streptococcus toxins (GBS) enhance IL-8 and ICAM-1 as well as nitric oxide (NO) production from endothelial cells via the expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) enhancement, resulting in BBB disruption. While Gram-negative bacteria, Haemophilus influenza OmpP2 is able to target the common carboxy-terminal domain of LR to start initial interaction with brain endothelium, then invade the brain. H. influenza type b (HiB), can induce BBB permeability through TJ disruption. LR and PAFR binding sites have been recognized as common routes of CNS entrance by Neisseria meningitidis. N. meningitidis species also initiate binding to BMECs and induces AJs deformation, as well as inducing specific cleavage of the TJ component occludin through the release of host MMP-8. Escherichia coli bind to BMECs through LR, resulting in IL-6 and IL-8 release and iNOS production, as well as resulting in disassembly of TJs between endothelial cells, facilitating BBB disruption. Therefore, obtaining knowledge of BBB disruption by different types of bacterial species will provide a picture of how the bacteria enter the central nervous system (CNS) which might support the discovery of therapeutic strategies for each bacteria to control and manage infection.     

Is Active Management the Key to the Conservation of Saproxylic Biodiversity? Pollarding Promotes the Formation of Tree Hollows

Trees with hollows are key features sustaining biodiversity in wooded landscapes. They host rich assemblages of often highly specialised organisms. Hollow trees, however, have become rare and localised in Europe. Many of the associated biota is thus declining or endangered. The challenge of its conservation, therefore, is to safeguard the presence of hollow trees in sufficient numbers. Populations of numerous species associated with tree hollows and dead wood are often found in habitats that were formed by formerly common traditional silvicultural practices such as coppicing, pollarding or pasture. Although it has been occasionally mentioned that such practices increase the formation of hollows and the availability of often sun-exposed dead wood, their effect has never been quantified. Our study examined the hollow incidence in pollard and non-pollard (unmanaged) willows and the effect of pollarding on incremental growth rate by tree ring analysis. The probability of hollow occurrence was substantially higher in pollard than in non-pollard trees. Young pollards, especially, form hollows much more often than non-pollards; for instance, in trees of 50 cm DBH, the probability of hollow ocurrence was ∼0.75 in pollards, but only ∼0.3 in non-pollards. No difference in growth rate was found. Pollarding thus leads to the rapid formation of tree hollows, a habitat usually associated with old trees. It is therefore potentially a very important tool in the restoration of saproxylic habitats and conservation of hollow-dependent fauna. If applied along e.g. roads and watercourses, pollarding could also be used to increase landscape connectivity for saproxylic organisms. In reserves where pollarding was formerly practiced, its restoration would be necessary to prevent loss of saproxylic biodiversity. Our results point to the importance of active management measures for maintaining availability, and spatial and temporal continuity of deadwood microhabitats.     

7 The Molecular Biology of Tryptophan Synthase: A Model for Protein–Protein Interaction

Abstract

The use of plastic produced from non-renewable resources constitutes a major environmental problem of the modern society. Polylactide polymers (PLA) have recently gained enormous attention as one possible substitution of petroleum derived polymers. A prerequisite for high quality PLA production is the provision of optically pure lactic acid, which cannot be obtained by chemical synthesis in an economical way. Microbial fermentation is therefore the commercial option to obtain lactic acid as monomer for PLA production. However, one major economic hurdle for commercial lactic acid production as basis for PLA is the costly separation procedure, which is needed to recover and purify the product from the fermentation broth. Yeasts, such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae (bakers yeast) offer themselves as production organisms because they can tolerate low pH and grow on mineral media what eases the purification of the acid. However, naturally yeasts do not produce lactic acid. By metabolic engineering, ethanol was exchanged with lactic acid as end product of fermentation. A vast amount of effort has been invested into the development of yeasts for lactic acid production since the first paper on this topic by Dequin and process insight. If pH stress is used as basis for DNA microarray analyses, in order to improve the host, what exactly is addressed? Growth? Or productivity? They might be connected, but can be negatively correlated. A better growing strain might not be a better producer. So if the question was growth, the answer might not be what was initially intended (productivity).

A major task for the future is to learn to ask the right questions – a lot of studies intended to lead to better productivity, did lead to interesting results, but NOT to better production strains.

Taking together what we learned from lactic acid production with yeasts, we see a bright future for bulk and fine chemical production with these versatile hosts.     

The Coordination of Centromere Replication,Spindle Formation,and Kinetochore–Microtubule Interaction in Budding Yeast

The kinetochore is a protein complex that assembles on centromeric DNA to mediate chromosome–microtubule interaction. Most eukaryotic cells form the spindle and establish kinetochore–microtubule interaction during mitosis, but budding yeast cells finish these processes in S-phase. It has long been noticed that the S-phase spindle in budding yeast is shorter than that in metaphase, but the biological significance of this short S-phase spindle structure remains unclear. We addressed this issue by using ask1-3, a temperature-sensitive kinetochore mutant that exhibits partially elongated spindles at permissive temperature in the presence of hydroxyurea (HU), a DNA synthesis inhibitor. After exposure to and removal of HU, ask1-3 cells show a delayed anaphase entry. This delay depends on the spindle checkpoint, which monitors kinetochore–microtubule interaction defects. Overproduction of microtubule-associated protein Ase1 or Cin8 also induces spindle elongation in HU-arrested cells. The spindle checkpoint-dependent anaphase entry delay is also observed after ASE1 or CIN8 overexpression in HU-arrested cells. Therefore, the shorter spindle in S-phase cells is likely to facilitate proper chromosome–microtubule interaction.     

Functional connectivity of the entorhinal–hippocampal space circuit

The mammalian space circuit is known to contain several functionally specialized cell types, such as place cells in the hippocampus and grid cells, head-direction cells and border cells in the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC). The interaction between the entorhinal and hippocampal spatial representations is poorly understood, however. We have developed an optogenetic strategy to identify functionally defined cell types in the MEC that project directly to the hippocampus. By expressing channelrhodopsin-2 (ChR2) selectively in the hippocampus-projecting subset of entorhinal projection neurons, we were able to use light-evoked discharge as an instrument to determine whether specific entorhinal cell groups—such as grid cells, border cells and head-direction cells—have direct hippocampal projections. Photoinduced firing was observed at fixed minimal latencies in all functional cell categories, with grid cells as the most abundant hippocampus-projecting spatial cell type. We discuss how photoexcitation experiments can be used to distinguish the subset of hippocampus-projecting entorhinal neurons from neurons that are activated indirectly through the network. The functional breadth of entorhinal input implied by this analysis opens up the potential for rich dynamic interactions between place cells in the hippocampus and different functional cell types in the entorhinal cortex (EC).