Scrapie infectivity is independent of amyloid staining properties of the N-terminally truncated prion protein

The prion protein undergoes a profound conformational change when the cellular isoform (PrP(C)) is converted into the disease-causing form (PrP(Sc)). Limited proteolysis of PrP(Sc) produces PrP 27-30, which readily polymerizes into amyloid. To study the relationship between PrP amyloid and infectivity, we employed organic solvents that perturb protein conformation. Hexafluoro-2-propanol (HFIP), which promotes alpha-helix formation, modified the ultrastructure of PrP amyloid and decreased the beta-sheet content as well as prion infectivity. HFIP reversibly decreased the binding of Congo red dye to the PrP amyloid rods while inactivation of prion infectivity was irreversible. In contrast, 1,1,1-trifluoro-2-propanol (TFIP) did not inactivate prion infectivity but like HFIP, TFIP did alter the morphology of the rods and abolished Congo red binding. Solubilization using various solvents and detergents produced monomeric and dimeric PrP that lacked infectivity. Proteinase K resistance of detergent-treated PrP 27-30 showed no correlation with scrapie infectivity. Our results separate prion infectivity from the amyloid properties of PrP 27-30 and underscore the dependence of prion infectivity on PrP(Sc) conformation. These findings also demonstrate that the specific beta-sheet-rich structures required for prion infectivity can be differentiated from those required for amyloid formation.     

Cytosolic prion protein toxicity is independent of cellular prion protein expression and prion propagation

Prion diseases are transmissible neurodegenerative diseases caused by a conformational isoform of the prion protein (PrP), a host-encoded cell surface sialoglycoprotein. Recent evidence suggests a cytosolic fraction of PrP (cyPrP) functions either as an initiating factor or toxic element of prion disease. When expressed in cultured cells, cyPrP acquires properties of the infectious conformation of PrP (PrP(Sc)), including insolubility, protease resistance, aggregation, and toxicity. Transgenic mice (2D1 and 1D4 lines) that coexpress cyPrP and PrP(C) exhibit focal cerebellar atrophy, scratching behavior, and gait abnormalities suggestive of prion disease, although they lack protease-resistant PrP. To determine if the coexpression of PrP(C) is necessary or inhibitory to the phenotype of these mice, we crossed Tg1D4(Prnp(+/+)) mice with PrP-ablated mice (TgPrnp(o/o)) to generate Tg1D4(Prnp(o/o)) mice and followed the development of disease and pathological phenotype. We found no difference in the onset of symptoms or the clinical or pathological phenotype of disease between Tg1D4(Prnp(+/+)) and Tg1D4(Prnp(o/o)) mice, suggesting that cyPrP and PrP(C) function independently in the disease state. Additionally, Tg1D4(Prnp(o/o)) mice were resistant to challenge with mouse-adapted scrapie (RML), suggesting cyPrP is inaccessible to PrP(Sc). We conclude that disease phenotype and cellular toxicity associated with the expression of cyPrP are independent of PrP(C) and the generation of typical prion disease.     

The relationship between Toluidine Blue staining and hexuronic acid content of cartilage matrix

Synopsis The relationship between the density of Toluidine Blue staining and the hexuronic acid content of xiphoid cartilage matrix has been investigated by microdensitometry and found to be linear. A given percentage reduction in the hexuronic acid content was accompanied by approximately twice that percentage reduction in the staining density. The ability to stain was lost when cartilage possessed approximately 42%, or less, of its normal hexuronic acid content.     

The prion protein

Transmissible spongiform encephalopathies form a group of fatal neurodegenerative disorders represented principally by Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans, and by scrapie and bovine spongiform encephalopathy in animals. Also called prion diseases, these disorders have the property of being infectious, sporadic or genetic in origin. Although the nature of the responsible agent of these diseases is uncertain, it is clear that a protein called PrPSc has a central role in their pathology. PrPSc is a conformational variant of a normal protein called PrPC. PrPC is a glycoprotein expressed by most tissues and is attached on the cell membrane by a glycosyl-phosphatidylinositol anchor which would be consistent with roles in cell adhesion, ligand uptake, or transmembrane signaling. NMR studies revealed that the protein has a globular domain and a long amino-terminal tail that contains repeated octapeptide domains which bind metal ions with high affinities. PrPC is localized on the cell membrane in detergent resistant microdomains and may be part of functional complexes with other molecules. This is particularly relevant, knowing the possible role of the molecule in signal transduction, resistance to oxidative stress and neuronal survival. In conclusion, it appears that the understanding of the biology of PrP is essential for the understanding of the physiological function of the protein as well as for its pathological conversion considering that trafficking of this molecule governs generation of PrPSc.     

Ultrasensitive detection of scrapie prion protein using seeded conversion of recombinant prion protein

The scrapie prion protein isoform, PrPSc, is a prion-associated marker that seeds the conformational conversion and polymerization of normal protease-sensitive prion protein (PrP-sen). This seeding activity allows ultrasensitive detection of PrPSc using cyclical sonicated amplification (PMCA) reactions and brain homogenate as a source of PrP-sen. Here we describe a much faster seeded polymerization method (rPrP-PMCA) which detects >or=50 ag of hamster PrPSc (approximately 0.003 lethal dose) within 2-3 d. This technique uses recombinant hamster PrP-sen, which, unlike brain-derived PrP-sen, can be easily concentrated, mutated and synthetically tagged. We generated protease-resistant recombinant PrP fibrils that differed from spontaneously initiated fibrils in their proteolytic susceptibility and by their infrared spectra. This assay could discriminate between scrapie-infected and uninfected hamsters using 2-microl aliquots of cerebral spinal fluid. This method should facilitate the development of rapid, ultrasensitive prion assays and diagnostic tests, in addition to aiding fundamental studies of structure and mechanism of PrPSc formation.     

Porcine prion protein amyloid

ABSTRACT

Mammalian prions are composed of misfolded aggregated prion protein (PrP) with amyloid-like features. Prions are zoonotic disease agents that infect a wide variety of mammalian species including humans. Mammals and by-products thereof which are frequently encountered in daily life are most important for human health. It is established that bovine prions (BSE) can infect humans while there is no such evidence for any other prion susceptible species in the human food chain (sheep, goat, elk, deer) and largely prion resistant species (pig) or susceptible and resistant pets (cat and dogs, respectively). PrPs from these species have been characterized using biochemistry, biophysics and neurobiology. Recently we studied PrPs from several mammals in vitro and found evidence for generic amyloidogenicity as well as cross-seeding fibril formation activity of all PrPs on the human PrP sequence regardless if the original species was resistant or susceptible to prion disease. Porcine PrP amyloidogenicity was among the studied. Experimentally inoculated pigs as well as transgenic mouse lines overexpressing porcine PrP have, in the past, been used to investigate the possibility of prion transmission in pigs. The pig is a species with extraordinarily wide use within human daily life with over a billion pigs harvested for human consumption each year. Here we discuss the possibility that the largely prion disease resistant pig can be a clinically silent carrier of replicating prions.     

The prion protein family

Although the pivotal implication of the host-encoded Prion protein, PrP, in the neuropathology of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy is known for decades, its biological role remains mostly elusive. Genetic inactivation is one way to assess such issue but, so far, PrP-knockout mice did not help much. However, recent reports involving (1) further studies of these mice during embryogenesis, (2) knockdown experiments in Zebrafish and (3) knockdown of Shadoo, a protein with PrP-like functional domains, in PrP-knockout mice, all suggested a role of the Prion protein family in early embryogenesis. This view is challenged by the recent report that PrP/Shadoo knockout mice are healthy and fertile. Although puzzling, these apparently contradictory data may on the contrary help at deciphering the Prion protein family role through focusing scientific attention outside the central nervous system and by helping the identification of other loci involved in the genetic robustness associated with PrP.     

Glycosylation and prion protein

Recent advances have elucidated the detailed glycosylation of the prion protein and highlighted the size of the sugars, which shield large areas of the protein and confer some conformational stability on the normal cellular form. The reliability of SDS-PAGE banding patterns of different "glycoforms" as a diagnostics tool has been discussed. The possibility exists that the glycans may play a role in the location of the prion protein on the neuronal cell surface. Alternative topologies and tethering of the prion glycoprotein on the cell membrane affect glycan site occupancy and may play a role in disease pathogenesis.     

Copper refolding of prion protein

We have shown previously that normal mouse prion protein (MoPrP) binds copper ions during protein refolding and acquires antioxidant activity. In this report, we probe the structure of the copper refolded form of MoPrP to determine how copper binding alters the secondary and tertiary features of the protein. Circular dichroism showed that recombinant MoPrP prepared in the presence of copper (as Cu(++)) showed an increased signal in the 210-220 nm range of the spectrum. Changes in protein conformation were localised to the N-terminal region of MoPrP using a panel of antibodies to assess epitope accessibility. The copper refolded recombinant prion protein had reduced proteinase K (PK) sensitivity when compared to the non-copper liganded form. Reduced PK sensitivity was not due to aggregation however as high resolution electron microscopy showed a homogenous preparation with little aggregate when compared to the non-copper form. Finally, disruption of the single disulphide linkage in MoPrP significantly diminished the antioxidant activity of the copper refolded form suggesting that activity was not solely dependent on bound copper but also on a conformation enabled by the formation of the disulphide bond.     

朊蛋白的细胞生物学研究

朊蛋白病是人和牛羊等哺乳动物所患的致命性的神经系统变性疾病,它是由机体内正常的朊蛋白改变构象后所引起的疾病。本综述对朊蛋白在细胞生物学领域的认知和理解进行了归纳总结,阐述了正常和异常朊蛋白的翻译、表达、定位、裂解、转化等一系列过程,是对疾病本质的有益探索。     

Solvent-dependent precipitation of prion protein

To mediate adaptation to stimuli, the methyltransferase (CheR) catalyzes methyl group transfer from S-adenosyl-L-methionine (SAM) to glutamyl residues in the transmembrane receptors of the bacterial chemosensory signaling pathway. The interaction between receptors and CheR occurs at two sites: a methylation site-active site interaction, and a 'docking' site interaction that is separated both from the methylation sites and the CheR active site. It is not certain if the docking site interaction functions merely to localize the transferase in close proximity to the methylation sites, or if it also increases CheR catalytic activity. Isothermal titration calorimetry experiments are conducted to test for allosteric interactions between the docking and active sites on CheR, which are expected to be present if docking activates CheR. The binding parameters (DeltaG, DeltaH, DeltaS) of a substrate analog of SAM, S-adenosyl-L-homocysteine (SAH), are measured both in the absence and presence of saturating concentrations of a pentapeptide (NWETF) that defines the docking receptor docking segment. SAH binding is unaffected by the presence of saturating NWETF, providing evidence that an allosteric activation of CheR does not take place upon docking, and thus supports the idea that the CheR-NWETF interaction merely functions to localize CheR near the sites of methylation.     

Functions of prion protein PrPc

It is now well established that both normal and pathological (or scrapie) isoforms of prion protein, PrPc and PrPsc respectively, are involved in the development and progression of various forms of neurodegenerative diseases, including scrapie in sheep, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (or "mad cow disease") and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in human, collectively known as prion diseases. The protein PrPc is highly expressed in the central nervous system in neurons and glial cells, and also present in non-brain cells, such as immune cells or epithelial and endothelial cells. Identification of the physiological functions of PrPc in these different cell types thus appears crucial for understanding the progression of prion diseases. Recent studies highlighted several major roles for PrPc that may be considered in two major domains : (1) cell survival (protection against oxidative stress and apoptosis) and (2) cell adhesion. In association with cell adhesion, distinct functions of PrPc were observed, depending on cell types : neuronal differentiation, epithelial and endothelial barrier integrity, transendothelial migration of monocytes, T cell activation. These observations suggest that PrPc functions may be particularly relevant to cellular stress, as well as inflammatory or infectious situations.     

Potential approaches for heterologous prion protein treatment of prion diseases

Prion diseases, or transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) are progressive, fatal neurodegenerative diseases with no effective treatment. The pathology of these diseases involves the conversion of a protease sensitive form of the cellular prion protein (PrP^C) into a protease resistant infectious form (PrP^res). The efficiency of this conversion is predicated upon a number of factors, most notably a strong homology between cellular PrP^C and PrP^res. In our recently published study, we infected mice with the RML-Chandler strain of scrapie and treated them with heterologous hamster prion proteins. This treatment was seen to reduce clinical signs of prion disease, to delay the onset of clinical symptoms and to prolong survival. In this current article we discuss potential mechanisms of action of treatment with heterologous prion proteins. We also discuss potential extensions of these studies using a heterologous rabbit PrP-based treatment strategy or a peptide based strategy, and improvement of treatment delivery including a lentiviral-based system.     

Cytosolic prion protein is the predominant anti-Bax prion protein form: exclusion of transmembrane and secreted prion protein forms in the anti-Bax function

Prion protein (PrP) prevents Bax-mediated cell death by inhibiting the initial Bax conformational change that converts cytosolic Bax into a pro-apoptotic protein. PrP is mostly a glycophosphatidylinositol-anchored cell surface protein but it is also retrotranslocated into cytosolic PrP (CyPrP) or can become a type 1 or type 2 transmembrane protein. To determine the form and subcellular location of the PrP that has anti-Bax function, we co-expressed various Syrian hamster PrP (SHaPrP) mutants that favour specific PrP topologies and subcellular localization with N-terminally green fluorescent protein tagged pro-apoptotic Bax (EGFP-Bax) in MCF-7 cells and primary human neurons. Mutants that generate both CyPrP and secreted PrP ((Sec)PrP) or only CyPrP have anti-Bax activity. Mutants that produce (Ctm)PrP or (Ntm)PrP lose the anti-Bax activity, despite their ability to also make (Sec)PrP. Transmembrane-generating mutants do not produce CyPrP and both normal and cognate mutant forms of CyPrP rescue against the loss of anti-Bax activity. (Sec)PrP-generating constructs also produce non-membrane attached (Sec)PrP. However, this form of PrP has minimal anti-Bax activity. We conclude that CyPrP is the predominant form of PrP with anti-Bax function. These results imply that the retrotranslocation of PrP encompasses a survival function and is not merely a pathway for the proteasomal degradation of misfolded protein.     

Biochemical fingerprints of prion diseases: scrapie prion protein in human prion diseases that share prion genotype and type

The phenotype of human prion diseases is influenced by the prion protein (PrP) genotype as determined by the methionine (M)/valine (V) polymorphism at codon 129, the scrapie PrP (PrPSc) type and the etiology. To gain further insight into the mechanisms of phenotype determination, we compared two-dimensional immunoblot profiles of detergent insoluble and proteinase K-resistant PrP species in a type of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJDMM2), variant CJD (vCJD) and sporadic fatal insomnia (sFI). Full-length and truncated PrP forms present in the insoluble fractions were also separately analyzed. These three diseases were selected because they have the same M/M PrP genotype at codon 129 and the same type 2 PrPSc, but different etiologies, also sCJDMM2 and sFI are sporadic, whereas vCJD is acquired by infection. We observed minor differences in the PrP detergent-insoluble fractions between sCJDMM2 and vCJD, although both differ in the corresponding fractions from sFI. We detected more substantial heterogeneity between sCJDMM2 and vCJD in the two-dimensional blots of the proteinase K-resistant PrP fraction suggesting that different PrP species are selected for conversion to proteinase K-resistant PrP in sCJDMM2 and vCJD. These differences are mostly, but not exclusively, due to variations in the type of the N-linked glycans. We also show that the over-representation of the highly glycosylated forms distinctive of the proteinase K-resistant PrPSc of vCJD in one-dimensional blots is due to differences in both the amount and the natures of the glycans. Overall, these findings underline the complexity of phenotypic determination in human prion diseases.     

The role of the prion protein membrane anchor in prion infection

Normal cellular and abnormal disease-associated forms of prion protein (PrP) contain a C-terminal glycophosphatidyl-inositol (GPI) membrane anchor. The importance of the GPI membrane anchor in prion diseases is unclear but there are data to suggest that it both is and is not required for abnormal prion protein formation and prion infection. Utilizing an in vitro model of prion infection we have recently demonstrated that, while the GPI anchor is not essential for the formation of abnormal prion protein in a cell, it is necessary for the establishment of persistent prion infection. In combination with previously published data, our results suggest that GPI anchored PrP is important in the amplification and spread of prion infectivity from cell to cell.Key words: prion, GPI anchor, PrP, prion spread, scrapieIn transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE or prion diseases) such as sheep scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and human Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, normally soluble and protease-sensitive prion protein (PrP-sen or PrP^C) is converted to an abnormal, insoluble and protease-resistant form termed PrP-res or PrP^Sc. PrP-res/PrP^Sc is believed to be the main component of the prion, the infectious agent of the TSE/prion diseases. Its precursor, PrP-sen, is anchored to the cell surface at the C-terminus by a co-translationally added glycophosphatidyl-inositol (GPI) membrane anchor which can be cleaved by the enzyme phosphatidyl-inositol specific phospholipase (PIPLC). The GPI anchor is also present in PrP-res, but is inaccessible to PIPLC digestion suggesting that conformational changes in PrP associated with PrP-res formation have blocked the PIPLC cleavage site.¹ Although the GPI anchor is present in both PrP-sen and PrP-res, its precise role in TSE diseases remains unclear primarily because there are data to suggest that it both is and is not necessary for PrP-res formation and prion infection.In tissue culture cells infected with mouse scrapie, PrP-res formation occurs at the cell surface and/or along the endocytic pathway^2–4 and may be dependent upon the membrane environment of PrP-sen. For example, localization via the GPI anchor to caveolae-like domains favors PrP-res formation⁵ while substitution of the GPI anchor addition site with carboxy termini favoring transmembrane anchored PrP-sen inhibits formation of PrP-res.^5,6 Other studies have shown that localization of both PrP-sen and PrP-res to lipid rafts, cholesterol and sphingolipid rich membrane microdomains where GPI anchored proteins can be located, is important in PrP-res formation.^6–9However, there are also data which suggest that such localization is not necessarily essential for PrP-res formation. Anchorless PrP-sen isolated from cells by immunoprecipitation or wild-type PrP-sen purified by immunoaffinity column followed by cation exchange chromatography are efficiently converted into PrP-res in cell-free systems.^10,11 Furthermore, recombinant PrP-sen derived from E. coli, which has no membrane anchor or glycosylation, can be induced to form protease-resistant PrP in vitro when reacted with prion-infected brain homogenates.^12–14 Finally, in at least one instance, protease-resistant recombinant PrP-res generated in the absence of infected brain homogenate was reported to cause disease when inoculated into transgenic mice.¹⁵The data concerning the role of the PrP-sen GPI anchor in susceptibility to TSE infection are similarly contradictory. Transgenic mice expressing anchorless mouse PrP-sen are susceptible to infection with mouse scrapie and accumulate both PrP-res and prion infectivity.¹⁶ Thus, the GPI anchor is clearly not needed for PrP-res formation or productive TSE infection in vivo. However, we recently published data demonstrating that, in vitro, anchored PrP-sen is in fact required to persistently infect cells.¹⁷ Given that anchorless PrP-sen is not present on the cell surface but is released into the cell medium, we speculated that the differences between the in vitro and in vivo data were related to the location of PrP-res formation. In the mice expressing anchorless PrP-sen, environments conducive to PrP-res formation are present in certain areas of the complex extracellular milieu of the brain where anchorless, secreted PrP-sen can accumulate and come into contact with PrP-res from the infectious inoculum. Since similar environments are missing in vitro, any PrP-res formation in cells expressing anchorless PrP-sen must be cell-associated. While this explanation addresses how extracellular PrP-res could be generated in an unusual transgenic mouse model of TSE infection, it does not really help to define how the GPI anchor is involved in normal prion infection of a cell.As with other infectious organisms such as viruses, TSE infection can be roughly divided into three steps: uptake, replication and spread. Over the last several years, data derived from new techniques as well as new cell lines susceptible to prion infection have increased our knowledge of some of the basic events that occur during each of these steps. In order to try to tease out the role of the GPI anchor in normal TSE pathogenesis, it is therefore useful to consider the process of TSE infection of a cell and how the GPI anchor might be involved in each stage.In a conventional viral infection, binding and uptake of the virus is essential to establish infection. Studying PrP-res uptake has been complicated by the lack of an antibody that can specifically distinguish PrP-res from PrP-sen in live cells and by the difficulty of detecting the input PrP-res from the PrP-res made de novo by the cell. Recently, however, several groups have been able to study PrP-res uptake using input PrP-res that was either fluorescently labeled^18–20 or tagged with the epitope to the monoclonal antibody 3F4,²¹ or cell lines that express little or no PrP-sen.^19,21–23 The data show that PrP-res uptake is independent of scrapie strain or cell type but is influenced by the PrP-res microenvironment as well as PrP-res aggregate size.²¹ Importantly, these studies demonstrated that PrP-sen expression was not required.^19,21–23 Given these data, it is clear that GPI anchored PrP-sen is not involved in the initial uptake of PrP-res into the cell.The next stage of prion infection involves replication of infectivity which is typically assayed by following cellular PrP-res formation. Once again, however, the issue of how to distinguish PrP-res in the inoculum from newly formed PrP-res in the cells has made it difficult to study the early stages of prion replication. To overcome this difficulty, we developed a murine tissue culture system that utilizes cells expressing mouse PrP-sen tagged with the epitope to the 3F4 antibody (Mo3F4 PrP-sen).²⁴ Wild-type mouse PrP does not have this epitope. As a result, following exposure to an infected mouse brain homogenate, de novo PrP-res formation can be followed by assaying for 3F4 positive PrP-res. Our studies showed that there were two stages of PrP-res formation: (1) an initial acute burst within the first 96 hours post-infection that was cell-type and scrapie strain independent and, (2) persistent PrP-res formation (i.e., formation of PrP-res over multiple cell passages) that was dependent on cell-type and scrapie strain and associated with long-term infection.²⁴ Acute PrP-res formation did not necessarily lead to persistent PrP-res formation suggesting that other cell-specific factors or processes are needed for PrP-res formation to persist.²⁴When cells expressing Mo3F4 PrP-sen without the GPI anchor (Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen) were exposed to mouse scrapie infected brain homogenates, GPI negative, 3F4 positive PrP-res (Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-res) was detected within 96 hours indicating that acute PrP-res formation had occurred.¹⁷ Thus, despite the fact that Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen is not expressed on the cell surface¹⁶ (Fig. 1A), it was still available for conversion to PrP-res. These results are consistent with data from cell-free systems and demonstrate that, at least acutely, membrane anchored PrP is not necessary for PrP-res formation in a cell.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Persistent infection of cells in vitro requires the expression of GPI-anchored cell surface PrP-sen. PrP knockout cells (CF10)²¹ were transduced with 3F4 epitope tagged mouse PrP-sen (Mo3F4), 3F4 epitope tagged mouse PrP-sen without the GPI anchor (Mo3F4 GPI-), or Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen plus wild-type, GPI anchored mouse PrP-sen (MoPrP). The cells were then exposed to the mouse scrapie strain 22L and passaged. (A) The presence of 3F4 epitope tagged, cell surface mouse PrP-sen was assayed by FACS analysis of fixed, non-permeabilized cells. CF10 cells expressing the following mouse PrP-sen molecules were assayed: Mo3F4 (solid line); Mo3F4 GPI⁻ (dashed line); Mo3F4 GPI⁻ + MoPrP (dotted and dashed line); Mo3F4 GPI⁻ + MoPrP infected with 22L scrapie (dotted line). Only cells expressing Mo3F4 PrP-sen were positive for cell surface, 3F4 epitope tagged PrP. (B) Persistent infection was analyzed by inoculating the cells intracranially into transgenic mice overexpressing MoPrP (Tga20 mice). Only cells expressing anchored mouse PrP-sen were susceptible to scrapie infection. Cells expressing anchorless mouse PrP-sen did not contain detectable infectivity in either the cells or the cellular supernatant (data not shown). Data in (B) are adapted from McNally 2009.¹⁷In terms of persistent PrP-res formation, however, our data suggest that the GPI anchor is important. Despite an initial burst of PrP-res formation within the first 96 hours post-infection, Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-res was not observed following passage of the cells nor did the cells become infected. This effect was not due either to resistance of the cells to scrapie infection or to an inability of the scrapie strain used to infect cells. When the same cells expressed anchored Mo3F4 PrP-sen and were exposed to the same mouse scrapie strain, both acute and persistent PrP-res formation were detected and the cells were persistently infected with scrapie (Fig. 1B).¹⁷ Taken together, these data demonstrate that cells expressing anchorless PrP-sen do not support persistent PrP-res formation. Furthermore, the data strongly suggest that GPI-anchored PrP-sen is required during the transition from acute to persistent scrapie infection. In support of this hypothesis, the resistance of cells expressing Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen to persistent prion infection could be overcome if wild-type GPI anchored PrP-sen was co-expressed in the same cell. When both forms of PrP-sen were expressed, anchored and anchorless forms of PrP-res were made and the cells became persistently infected (Fig. 1B).¹⁷ Thus, the data suggest that GPI anchored PrP is necessary to establish prion infection within a cell.How could GPI membrane anchored PrP be involved in the establishment and maintenance of persistent prion infection? Several studies have suggested that the GPI anchor is needed to localize PrP-sen to specific membrane environments where PrP-res formation is favored.^5–8 However, if this localization was essential for PrP-res formation, GPI-PrP-sen would presumably never form PrP-res. Lacking the GPI anchor, it would not be in the correct membrane environment to support conversion. As a result, neither acute nor persistent prion infection could occur. This is obviously not the case. Transgenic mice expressing only anchorless PrP-sen generate PrP-res and can be infected with scrapie even though (1) flotation gradients showed that anchorless PrP-sen was not in the same membrane environment as anchored PrP-sen and, (2) flow cytometry analysis demonstrated that anchorless PrP-sen was not present on the cell surface.¹⁶ Thus, the GPI anchor is not needed to target PrP-sen to a conversion friendly membrane environment.Consistent with the idea that the GPI anchor is not essential for PrP-res formation, in our studies anchorless PrP-sen could form PrP-res in cells acutely infected with scrapie despite the fact that it is processed differently than anchored PrP-sen, is not present on the cell surface (Fig. 1A), and is secreted.¹⁷ Persistent formation of anchorless PrP-res only occurred when both anchored and anchorless forms of PrP were expressed in the same cell.¹⁷ For this to happen both types of PrP must share a cellular compartment where PrP-res formation occurs, presumably either on the cell surface or in a specific location along the endocytic pathway^2,3 such as the endosomal recycling compartment.⁴ Analysis of infected and uninfected cells co-expressing Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen and wild-type PrP-sen demonstrated that Mo3F4 GPI-PrP-sen was not present on the cell surface (Fig. 1A). Thus, it is unlikely that GPI-PrP-res formation is occurring on the cell surface. We speculate that the anchored form of PrP-res encounters anchorless PrP-sen along either a secretory or endocytic pathway, allowing for the formation of anchorless PrP-res. Regardless of the precise location, the in vitro and in vivo data strongly suggest that the role of the anchor in persistent prion infection is not simply to localize PrP-sen to an environment compatible with PrP-res formation.However, the data are consistent with the idea that GPI anchored PrP is absolutely essential for the establishment of persistent infection in vitro. This is likely related to the spread of infectivity within a culture that is necessary for maintaining a persistent infection over time. Evidence suggests that PrP-res can be transferred between cells in a variety of ways including mother-daughter cell division,²⁵ cell-to-cell contact^26,27 and exosomes.²⁸ Tunneling nanotubes have also been hypothesized to be involved in intercellular prion spread¹⁹ and recent data suggest that spread can occur via these structures.²⁰ Any of these processes could involve the cell-to-cell transfer of PrP-res in membrane containing particles as has been observed in cell-free⁷ and cell-based systems.²⁹ If cell-to-cell contact were required, for example via simple physical proximity or perhaps tunneling nanotubes,^19,20 then the conversion of cell surface PrP-sen on the naïve cell by cell surface PrP-res on the infected cell would transfer infection to the naïve cell. In this instance, GPI membrane anchored, cell surface PrP-sen would be essential as it would allow for PrP-res formation on the cell surface. If spread is via cell division, then GPI-anchored, cell surface PrP-sen would be important for its role as a precursor to PrP-res formation.² In this instance, cell surface PrP-sen would be an essential intermediate in the continuous formation of PrP-res necessary for the accumulation and amplification of PrP-res within the cell. It would also help to cycle PrP between the cell surface and intracellular compartments where PrP-res can be formed.⁴ In either case, GPI-anchored PrP-sen would facilitate the accumulation of intracellular PrP-res to high enough levels to maintain both persistent infection in the mother cell and enable the transfer of organelles containing sufficient PrP-res to initiate infection in the daughter cell. Thus, we would suggest that efficient spread of infectivity requires not just the passive transfer of PrP-res from cell-to-cell but the concurrent initiation of conversion and amplification of PrP-res via cell surface, GPI anchored PrP-sen.In vivo, several lines of evidence suggest that the spread of scrapie infectivity also requires de novo PrP-res formation in the recipient cell and not simply transfer of PrP-res from one cell to another. For example, when neurografts from PrP expressing mice were placed in the brains of PrP knockout mice and the mice were challenged intracranially with scrapie, the graft showed scrapie pathology, but the surrounding tissue did not.³⁰ Furthermore, PrP-res from the graft migrated to the host tissue demonstrating that simple transfer of PrP-res was not sufficient and that PrP-sen expression was required for the spread of scrapie pathology.³⁰ In fact, these mice did not develop scrapie pathology following peripheral infection even when peripheral lymphoid tissues were reconstituted with PrP-sen expressing cells.³¹ Even though PrP-sen expressing cells were present in both the brain and spleen, in order for infectivity to spread from the lymphoreticular system to the central nervous system PrP-sen expression was also required in an intermediate tissue such as peripheral nerve.^31,32 Given that PrP-res uptake and trafficking do not require PrP-sen, the most obvious explanation for the requirement of PrP-sen in contiguous tissues is that de novo PrP-res formation in naïve cells is necessary for (1) infectivity to move from cell to cell within a tissue and, (2) infectivity to move from tissue to tissue.Another study demonstrated that peripheral expression of heterologous mouse PrP significantly increased the incubation time and actually prevented clinical disease in the majority of transgenic mice expressing hamster PrP in neurons of the brain.³³ Once again, if simple transfer and uptake of PrP-res were sufficient for spread, the presence of heterologous PrP molecules should not interfere because cellular uptake of PrP-res is independent of PrP-sen expression.^19,21–23 Clinical disease in these mice was likely prevented by the heterologous PrP molecule interfering with conversion of PrP-sen to PrP-res suggesting that prevention of de novo PrP-res formation inhibits spread of PrP-res and infectivity. These in vivo data, when combined with our recent in vitro data,¹⁷ provide evidence to support the importance of cell surface, and by extension GPI-anchored, PrP in the spread of prion infection.Our data demonstrate that the GPI anchor plays a role in the establishment of persistent scrapie infection in vitro. In our tissue culture system,²¹ as well as others where spread of infectivity by cell to cell contact appears to be limited,^25,34 the role of GPI anchored PrP-sen would be to amplify PrP-res to enable the efficient transfer of infectivity from mother to daughter cell. In cell systems where spread of prion infectivity may require cell to cell contact,^26,27 we propose that the role of GPI anchored PrP-sen is to facilitate the spread of prion infection via a chain of conversion from cell-to-cell, a “domino” type spread of infection that has been previously hypothesized.^35,36In vivo, such a mechanism might explain why neuroinvasion does not necessarily require axonal transport^32,37,38 and can occur independently of the axonal neurofilament machinery.³⁹ It would likely vary with cell type²⁷ and be most important in areas where infectivity is transferred from the periphery to the nervous system as well as in areas where cell division may be limited. It is also possible, if the location of PrP-res formation differs for different scrapie strains,⁴⁰ that the relative importance of a domino-like spread of infectivity in vivo would vary with the scrapie strain.Of course, spread of infectivity via a “wave” of GPI anchored, PrP mediated conversion would not preclude the spread of infectivity by other intracellular means such as axonal transport (reviewed in ref. ⁴¹). Furthermore, spread of infectivity may still also occur extracellularly such as in the unique case of mice which express anchorless PrP-sen,¹⁶ where our in vitro data would suggest that the cells themselves are not infected. In such a case, spread would require neither GPI anchored PrP-sen nor amplification of PrP-res in cells but would likely occur via other means such as blood⁴¹ or interstitial fluid flow.⁴²     

The role of the prion protein membrane anchor in prion infection

In transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE or prion diseases) such as sheep scrapie, bovine spongiform encephalopathy and human Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, normally soluble and protease-sensitive prion protein (PrP-sen or PrPC) is converted to an abnormal, insoluble and protease-resistant form termed PrP-res or PrPSc. PrP-res/PrPSc is believed to be the main component of the prion, the infectious agent of the TSE/prion diseases. Its precursor, PrP-sen, is anchored to the cell surface at the C-terminus by a co-translationally added glycophosphatidyl-inositol (GPI) membrane anchor which can be cleaved by the enzyme phosphatidyl-inositol specific phospholipase (PIPLC). The GPI anchor is also present in PrP-res, but is inaccessible to PIPLC digestion suggesting that conformational changes in PrP associated with PrP-res formation have blocked the PIPLC cleavage site. Although the GPI anchor is present in both PrP-sen and PrP-res, its precise role in TSE diseases remains unclear primarily because there are data to suggest that it both is and is not necessary for PrP-res formation and prion infection.