|
|
|
|
Vol. 11, Issue 5, 1555-1569, May 2000

and
*Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, A-1030 Vienna,
Austria; and
Protein Interaction Laboratory, Odense
University, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The ordered activation of the ubiquitin protein ligase anaphase-promoting complex (APC) or cyclosome by CDC20 in metaphase and by CDH1 in telophase is essential for anaphase and for exit from mitosis, respectively. Here, we show that CDC20 can only bind to and activate the mitotically phosphorylated form of the Xenopus and the human APC in vitro. In contrast, the analysis of phosphorylated and nonphosphorylated forms of CDC20 suggests that CDC20 phosphorylation is neither sufficient nor required for APC activation. On the basis of these results and the observation that APC phosphorylation correlates with APC activation in vivo, we propose that mitotic APC phosphorylation is an important mechanism that controls the proper timing of APCCDC20 activation. We further show that CDH1 is phosphorylated in vivo during S, G2, and M phase and that CDH1 levels fluctuate during the cell cycle. In vitro, phosphorylated CDH1 neither binds to nor activates the APC as efficiently as does nonphosphorylated CDH1. Nonphosphorylatable CDH1 mutants constitutively activate APC in vitro and in vivo, whereas mutants mimicking the phosphorylated form of CDH1 are constitutively inactive. These results suggest that mitotic kinases have antagonistic roles in regulating APCCDC20 and APCCDH1; the phosphorylation of APC subunits is required to allow APC activation by CDC20, whereas the phosphorylation of CDH1 prevents activation of the APC by CDH1. These mechanisms can explain the temporal order of APC activation by CDC20 and CDH1 and may help to ensure that exit from mitosis is not initiated before anaphase has occurred.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The initiation of anaphase and exit from mitosis depend on
activation of the anaphase-promoting complex (APC) or cyclosome, a
multisubunit complex that ubiquitinates mitotic regulators such as
securin and cyclin B and thus targets them for destruction by the 26S
proteasome (Peters, 1998
; Morgan, 1999
; Zachariae and Nasmyth, 1999
).
Because the proper timing of APC activation is important for the
correct timing of anaphase and other late mitotic events, APC has to be
tightly regulated. Several mechanisms have been implicated in APC
regulation, but how APC is activated in mitosis is not well understood.
Several APC subunits are phosphorylated during mitosis (King et
al., 1995
; Peters et al., 1996
; Yamada et
al., 1997
). These modifications appear to be required for high
levels of APC activity because dephosphorylation of mitotic APC in
vitro reduces its activity (Lahav-Baratz et al., 1995
;
Peters et al., 1996
; Fang et al., 1998
) and
because phosphorylation of interphase APC in vitro partially stimulates
its activity (Lahav-Baratz et al., 1995
; Kotani et
al., 1998
). Consistent with these results, mitotic kinases are
required for cyclin B degradation in Xenopus extracts (Felix et al., 1990
; Grieco et al., 1996
;
Descombes and Nigg, 1998
; Patra and Dunphy, 1998
), but the identity of
the kinases involved remains controversial, and the precise mechanism
of phosphorylation-mediated APC activation is unknown.
It is furthermore clear that phosphorylation alone cannot be
responsible for mitotic activation of the APC because in vivo and in
vitro this event also depends on a protein called CDC20, Fizzy,
p55CDC, or Slp1 (Dawson et al., 1995
;
Sigrist et al., 1995
; Visintin et al., 1997
; Fang
et al., 1998
; Kramer et al., 1998
; Lorca et al., 1998
; Shirayama et al., 1998
). CDC20 is one of two
related WD40 repeat proteins that are thought to activate the
APC by physical association. CDC20 is a mitosis-specific activator,
whereas the related protein CDH1 (also called Cdh1p/Hct1p,
Fizzy-related, Ste9, or Srw1) appears to maintain APC active during the
G1 phase of proliferating cells (Schwab et al., 1997
;
Sigrist and Lehner, 1997
; Visintin et al., 1997
; Fang
et al., 1998
; Kramer et al., 1998
; Zachariae
et al., 1998
; Jaspersen et al., 1999
) and during G0 in differentiated cells (Gieffers et al., 1999
). In
budding yeast, Cdc20p is specifically required for degradation of the securin Pds1p, whereas Cdh1p/Hct1p is required for proteolysis of the
mitotic cyclin Clb2p (Schwab et al., 1997
; Visintin et al., 1997
; Shirayama et al., 1998
). Because Pds1p and
Clb2p degradation is important for anaphase and for exit from mitosis,
respectively, the temporal order of APC activation by Cdc20p and
Cdh1p/Hct1p is probably essential to ensure that exit from mitosis does
not occur before sister chromatid separation has been initiated. How the temporal order of APC activation is achieved is only partially understood. In yeast, only nonphosphorylated forms of Cdh1p/Hct1p can
bind to and activate the APC (Zachariae et al., 1998
;
Jaspersen et al., 1999
), indicating that low-kinase levels
allow Cdh1p/Hct1p to activate the APC during G1. Recently, the
phosphatase Cdc14p has been shown to dephosphorylate Hct1p/Cdh1p at the
end of mitosis and thus to activate it (Visintin et al.,
1998
; Jaspersen et al., 1999
). Whether CDH1 is
regulated by similar mechanisms in other organisms has not been
investigated yet.
It is also not well understood, in any organism, how the ability of
CDC20 to activate the APC is temporally regulated. Several mechanisms
may contribute to this. First, in somatic animal cells and in yeast,
CDC20 levels are controlled by transcriptional and proteolytic
mechanisms that result in CDC20 synthesis during S and G2 phase and in
its degradation at the end of mitosis (Weinstein, 1997
; Fang
et al., 1998
; Kramer et al., 1998
; Prinz et
al., 1998
; Shirayama et al., 1998
). However, this
phenomenon is not sufficient to explain the mitotic specificity of
CDC20 because CDC20 accumulates before APC becomes active (Fang
et al., 1998
; Kramer et al., 1998
; Prinz et
al., 1998
; Shirayama et al., 1998
) and because the
levels of this protein are constant in embryonic cell cycles (Lorca
et al., 1998
). Second, in cells in which spindle assembly
has not been completed, a surveillance mechanism known as the spindle assembly checkpoint inhibits the ability of CDC20-APC complexes (APCCDC20) to initiate anaphase (reviewed by
Sorger et al., 1997
; Amon, 1999
). The checkpoint
mechanism depends on MAD2, a protein that is believed to inhibit
CDC20 function by directly binding to it. It is therefore possible that
derepression of the MAD2 signal has a role in mitotic activation of
APCCDC20. However, this mechanism is also
not sufficient to explain the mitotic regulation of CDC20 because the
spindle assembly checkpoint is not functional in embryonic cell cycles
(Minshull et al., 1994
). The idea that MAD2 alone cannot
account for CDC20 regulation is further supported by the observation
that the degradation of A-type cyclins, which depends on
APCCDC20 (Dawson et al., 1995
; Sigrist
et al., 1995
; Sudakin et al., 1995
) (Geley and
Hunt, personal communication), is not inhibited by activation of
the spindle assembly checkpoint (Whitfield et al., 1990
;
Hunt et al., 1992
; Edgar et al., 1994
;
Minshull et al., 1994
). Finally, it has also been observed
that CDC20 is phosphorylated during mitosis (Weinstein, 1997
; Kramer
et al., 1998
; Lorca et al., 1998
), raising the
possibility that this modification contributes to CDC20 regulation.
Here we show that the phosphorylation of APC core subunits is
required to allow CDC20 to bind to and to activate the vertebrate APC,
whereas the phosphorylation of CDH1 prevents binding
to and activation of the APC by CDH1.
|
These mechanisms may explain the temporal order of APC activation by
CDC20 and CDH1. During preparation of this manuscript, two articles
were published that also address the activation of APC by CDC20; in
agreement with our results, Shteinberg et al. (1999)
found
that in vitro-translated human CDC20/Fizzy can only activate the
mitotically phosphorylated form of the clam APC or cyclosome,
whereas Kotani et al. (1999)
reported that
phosphorylation of CDC20, but not of the APC, is required for APC
activation. We compare these results with our data in the DISCUSSION.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Recombinant Protein Expression
[35S]methionine- and
[35S]cysteine-labeled human CDC20 and CDH1 and
Xenopus CDC25 proteins were prepared by coupled
transcription-translation reactions in rabbit reticulocyte lysate
(Promega, Madison, WI). For baculovirus expression, human CDC20 and
CDH1 cDNAs were cloned with an N-terminal 6-His-hemagglutinin
tag into pFASTBAC (Life Technologies, Gaithersburg, MD). Virus
was generated with the BAC-TO-BAC system (Life Technologies). Sf9 cells
were used for virus amplification and protein expression. Protein
extracts were prepared 45-48 h after infection in buffer containing 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1% Nonidet P-40 (NP-40), 10%
glycerol, 2 mM EDTA, 50 mM NaF, 0.25 mM
Na3VO4, 1 mM PMSF, 1 mM
DTT, 1 µM okadaic acid (OA; Calbiochem, San Diego, CA), and 10 µg/ml each of chymostatin, leupeptin, and pepstatin (Sigma, St.
Louis, MO). After 20 min on ice with occasional douncing, the lysates
were centrifuged at 15,000 rpm in a microcentrifuge, shock
frozen in liquid nitrogen, and stored at
70°C. In some experiments
Sf9 cells were treated with 0.1 µM OA for 3 h before harvesting.
Where indicated, extracts were used directly for APC binding and
activation assays. For native purification of CDC20 and CDH1 on
nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid agarose (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany), cells
were lysed in an EmulsiFlex-C5 homogenator (Avestin, Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada) in buffer containing 50 mM sodium phosphate, pH 8.0, 450 mM
NaCl, 10 mM imidazole, 1% NP-40, 10% glycerol, 50 mM NaF, 0.25 mM
Na3VO4, 2 mM
-mercaptoethanol, 0.5 µM OA, 20 mM
-glycerophosphate, and 10 µg/ml each of chymostatin, leupeptin, and pepstatin. After washing
with 20 and 50 mM imidazole, the protein was eluted with 250 mM
imidazole. Lysates from Sf9 cells triply infected with baculoviruses
encoding human cyclin B and CDK1 and Xenopus p9 (Patra and
Dunphy, 1998
) were used directly for phosphorylation experiments.
Antibodies
Antibodies to human cyclin A and B were from Santa Cruz
Biotechnology (Santa Cruz, CA), monoclonal anti-6-His-tag
antibodies were from Clontech (Cambridge, UK), and monoclonal CDC27
antibodies were from Transduction Laboratories (Lexington, KY).
Monoclonal antibodies against Xenopus cyclin A and B were
kindly provided by T. Hunt (Imperial Cancer Research Fund, South Mimms,
United Kingdom), and polyclonal CDC27 antibodies were kindly provided by C. Gieffers (Research Institute of Molecular Pathology, Vienna, Austria). CDC20 and CDH1 antibodies have been described (Kramer et al., 1998
; Gieffers et al., 1999
).
Cell Culture and Cell Synchronization
HeLa cells were synchronized by a thymidin block as described
(Fang et al., 1998
). Xenopus XL177 cells were
grown at 25°C in 70% L-15 Leibovitz media (Sigma), 10% fetal bovine
serum, 20% PBS, 0.3 mg/ml L-glutamine, 100 U/ml
penicillin, and 100 µg/ml streptomycin. HeLa and Xenopus
XL177 cell extracts and Xenopus interphase egg extracts were
prepared as described (Kramer et al., 1998
; Vorlaufer and
Peters, 1998
). Lipofectamine Plus (Life Technologies) was used to
transfect HeLa cells with the different pEGFP-N (Clontech) constructs.
Green fluorescent protein (GFP)-positive and -negative cells
were sorted 24 and 48 h after transfection in a Becton Dickinson
fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) vantage (Rutherford, NJ).
cDNA Mutagenesis
Point mutations were constructed by the QuickChange Site-Directed Mutagenesis Kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA). The constructs pET-CDC20 and pET-CDH1 were used as templates.
In Vitro Kinase and Phosphatase Assays
Kinase assays were performed in a volume of 15 µl using 2 µl
of in vitro translation mixture and 2 µl of lysate from Sf9 cells containing cyclin B, CDK1, and p9 (see above). The kinase buffer contained 80 mM
-glycerophosphate, 15 mM
MgCl2, 20 mM EGTA, 1 mM DTT, 1 mM ATP, 0.1%
NP-40, 1 µM OA, and 10 mg/ml each of chymostatin, leupeptin, and
pepstatin. Kinase assays were stopped by the addition of 10 µM
staurosporin (Sigma).
-Protein phosphatase treatment was done in a
volume of 50 µl using 25 µl of APC beads, 4 µl of
-protein
phosphatase (1600 U; New England Biolabs, Beverly, MA), and 2 mM
MnCl2 in the reaction buffer provided by the
manufacturer. The reaction was stopped by the addition of 50 mM EDTA.
Immunoprecipitation, Binding, and Ubiquitination Assays
Immunoprecipitations, in vitro binding, and ubiquitination
assays were done as described (Kramer et al., 1998
) with the
following modified washing conditions: immunoprecipitates were washed
once with buffer A (buffer QA [Kramer et al., 1998
] plus 2 mM EDTA, pH 8.0, 50 mM NaF, 0.25 mM
Na3VO4, 20 mM
-glycerophosphate, and 10 µg/ml each of chymostatin, leupeptin,
and pepstatin), twice with buffer A plus 400 mM KCl and 0.5% NP-40,
twice with buffer A, and once with QA. Ubiquitination activities were
quantified with the ImageQuant version 1.11 program from Molecular
Dynamics (Sunnyvale, CA) and CA-Cricket Graph III version 1.5.1 from
Computer Associates International (Islandia, NY).
Mass Spectrometry
Phosphorylated and nonphosphorylated CDC20s were treated as
described previously, resulting in tryptic peptide mixtures (Shevchenko et al., 1996
). They were purified on homemade microcolumns
using POROS R2 and R3 (Perseptive, Framingham, MA.). To localize
phosphopeptides, parent ion scans of the reporter ion m/z 79 were
performed in the negative ion mode on a triple quadrupole mass
spectrometer (API 300; Sciex, Toronto, Ontario, Canada). These parent
ion scans specifically recognize peptides that lose phosphate ions.
Multistep elutions were used to improve sequence coverage (Neubauer and Mann, 1999
). A quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometer
(Q-STAR; Sciex) equipped with a nanoelectrospray source
(MDS Protana, Odense, Denmark) was used to sequence selected
phosphopeptides (Shevchenko et al., 1997
).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The Kinetics of Mitotic APC Phosphorylation Correlates with the Onset of Cyclin Degradation in Somatic and Embryonic Cell Cycles
Vertebrate APC is composed of 10 or more subunits (Grossberger
et al., 1999
) at least 4 of which are phosphorylated during mitosis in Xenopus eggs (Peters et al., 1996
) and
in human cells (Gieffers and Peters, unpublished results). To test
whether the temporal occurrence of these modifications is consistent
with them having a role in APC activation, we first analyzed the
kinetics of mitotic APC phosphorylation in somatic cell cycles in vivo and in embryonic cell cycles in vitro and compared them with the kinetics of mitotic cyclin ubiquitination and degradation. To analyze
somatic cell cycles, we synchronized human HeLa cells by a
double-thymidine arrest-and-release protocol (Figure
1A-C). The cyclin B ubiquitination
activity of the APC isolated at different time points increased at
8.5 h (Figure 1B), at the same time at which a portion of the APC
subunit CDC27 underwent a phosphorylation-mediated electrophoretic
mobility shift (Figure 1C). The levels of cyclin A began to decrease
between 9 and 9.5 h when CDC27 phosphorylation reached maximal
levels (Figure 1C). Cyclin B and CDC20 began to disappear after
10.5 h (Figure 1C), consistent with previous reports of cyclin A
being degraded before cyclin B (Whitfield et al., 1990
; Hunt
et al., 1992
; Edgar et al., 1994
;
Minshull et al., 1994
). We conclude that the ability of
immunopurified APC to ubiquitinate cyclin B in vitro (Figure 1B)
temporally correlates with CDC27 phosphorylation (Figure 1C). Because
cyclin A is believed to be a substrate of
APCCDC20, maximal CDC27 phosphorylation also
appears to correlate with the onset of APC activity in vivo (Figure
1C). We did not investigate further why the cyclin B ubiquitination
activity of immunopurified APC (Figure 1B) increased significantly
before the levels of endogenous cyclin B decreased (Figure 1C), but
this observation would be consistent with the possibility that MAD2
delays cyclin B proteolysis in vivo (Gorbsky et al., 1998
)
but may be lost during our APC immunoprecipitation procedure. The CDH1
data obtained in this experiment (Figure 1C) will be described below.
Similar, but not identical, results were obtained in Xenopus
egg extracts that entered a mitotic state in vitro (Figure 1, D and E).
Addition of recombinant nondegradable cyclin B to interphase extracts
resulted in entry into mitosis after 15 min, as judged by a
phosphorylation-dependent electrophoretic mobility shift of the
phosphatase CDC25 (Figure 1E). CDC27 phosphorylation could first be
observed at 20 min and became maximal between 27 and 30 min (Figure
1E). The levels of cyclin A began to decrease at 25 min, i.e., shortly
after CDC27 phosphorylation was initiated (Figure 1E). The levels of
endogenous cyclin B began to decrease at 30 min when CDC27
phosphorylation was maximal (Figure 1E), and the assembly of
polyubiquitin chains on radiolabeled cyclin B added to the extracts
began at the same time (Figure 1D). CDC20 is not degraded in
Xenopus extracts (Lorca et al., 1998
), but CDC20
phosphorylation could be observed at the same time as CDC27 phosphorylation (Figure 1E). We conclude that in embryonic cell cycles
both CDC27 and CDC20 phosphorylation correlates with the onset of APC
activity. CDH1 was not analyzed in this experiment because
Xenopus embryos do not contain detectable amounts of this protein (Lorca et al., 1998
) (Figure
2). Our data from somatic and from
embryonic cell cycles would thus be consistent with mitotic APC
phosphorylation having a role in APC activation.
|
Mitotic Phosphorylation of the APC Is Required to Allow Activation by CDC20 But Has No Influence on Activation by CDH1
To obtain insight into the functional relevance of mitotic APC
phosphorylation, we next analyzed the ability of recombinant CDC20 and
CDH1 to associate with and to activate phosphorylated and
nonphosphorylated forms of the APC. We generated baculoviruses encoding
tagged versions of human CDC20 and CDH1 and expressed these proteins in
Sf9 insect cells. Figure 2 shows that these proteins are present as
soluble proteins in insect cell lysates and that their phosphorylation
in vivo results in an electrophoretic mobility shift similar to the one
seen in mitotic human cells and in mitotic Xenopus extracts.
We tested the effects of these proteins by incubating immunopurified
Xenopus APC in fractions from Sf9 cell lysates containing
either CDC20, CDH1, or no ectopically expressed protein. APC was
subsequently removed from the lysates, washed, and analyzed for its
ability to support the ubiquitination of a radiolabeled cyclin B
fragment in a reconstituted reaction containing purified E1 and E2
enzymes (Figure 3A). In these
experiments, the CDC20-containing fraction was able to stimulate the
cyclin B ubiquitination activity of mitotic APC (Figure 3A, reaction 7), whereas CDC20 had a smaller effect on APC isolated from interphase extracts (Figure 3A, reaction 2). This difference was not caused by a
general inability of the interphase APC to be activated because fractions containing CDH1 stimulated both interphase and mitotic forms
of APC equally well (Figure 3A, reactions 3 and 8; note that the
activation of mitotic APC by CDH1 can occur in vitro but presumably not
in vivo because CDH1 phosphorylation would prevent APC activation under
these conditions [see below]). Similar results were obtained when we
used CDC20 and CDH1 that were highly enriched from the Sf9 cell lysates
by affinity chromatography (Figure 4, A
and B). Fractions prepared by the same technique from noninfected Sf9
cell lysates had no effect on APC activity (Figure 4, A and B),
suggesting that the stimulatory effects observed were caused by CDC20
and CDH1 and not by contaminating proteins from the Sf9 cells.
|
|
To investigate whether activation of mitotic APC by CDC20 and by CDH1 correlated with the ability of these proteins to associate with the APC, we analyzed the amounts of recombinant CDC20 and CDH1 that bound to APC (Figure 3C). We were unable to detect any recombinant CDC20 in association with interphase APC, but a small amount of CDC20 could be detected in association with mitotic APC (Figure 3C, reactions 2 and 7). The CDC20 bound to mitotic APC could not be removed by washing in buffers containing high-salt concentrations and detergents, and no CDC20 could be recovered on antibody beads without bound APC (our unpublished results), suggesting that CDC20 binds specifically to mitotic APC. In contrast to CDC20, CDH1 bound equally well to mitotic and interphase APC (Figure 3C, reactions 3 and 8). We observed reproducibly in these experiments that much less CDC20 than CDH1 was bound to mitotic APC (Figure 3C, compare reactions 7 and 8), although similar amounts of these proteins were added to the reactions (Figure 3D, lanes 1 and 2). We presently do not know the reason for this difference.
To test whether differences in the phosphorylation status of APC were
responsible for the different results obtained with interphase and
mitotic APC, we dephosphorylated mitotic APC with
-protein
phosphatase (
-PPase) before incubation with CDC20. The
-PPase
treatment resulted in the dephosphorylation of APC subunits as judged
by CDC27 electrophoretic mobility shifts (Figure 3B, reactions 14-16)
and abolished the ability of CDC20 to bind to and to activate APC
strongly (Figure 3, A and C, reaction 15). This effect was not caused
by general damage of the APC that could have occurred during the
-PPase treatment because both dephosphorylated mitotic and
interphase APCs associated with CDH1 and were activated by it equally
as well as APC that had not been treated with
-PPase (Figure 3, A
and C, reactions 13 and 16).
Our data so far suggested that mitotic phosphorylation of the APC is important for activation by CDC20 but not for activation by CDH1. To quantitate this difference we determined the amounts of purified CDC20 and CDH1 that are required to activate interphase and mitotic APC (Figure 4, C-F). These experiments revealed that similar doses of CDH1 were required to activate interphase and mitotic APC (Figure 4D). Similar amounts of CDC20 were able to activate mitotic APC, but the activity of interphase APC could only be stimulated weakly, even when very high doses of CDC20 were used (Figure 4C). These results further support the conclusion that only the mitotic form of the APC can be activated by CDC20. On the basis of the observation that CDC20 can only bind to mitotic APC (Figure 3C), we suspect that the different susceptibilities of interphase and mitotic APC to be activated by CDC20 reflect different affinities of mitotic and interphase APC for CDC20, although direct affinity measurements would be required to confirm this.
To ensure that the differences that we observed between mitotic
and interphase APC were not restricted to embryonic forms of the APC,
we also analyzed the effects of CDC20 on APC isolated from human cells
enriched in S phase or metaphase. In agreement with the results
obtained with Xenopus APC, we found that CDC20 could
activate mitotic human APC but not APC from S phase cells or mitotic
APC treated with
-PPase, whereas CDH1 activated all forms of the APC
equally well (our unpublished results).
Mitotic CDC20 Phosphorylation Is Not Required for APC Activation
To analyze whether mitotic CDC20 phosphorylation influences CDC20
binding to the APC or APC activation, we generated phosphorylated forms
of CDC20. We observed that electrophoretic mobility shifts resembling
the phosphorylation-dependent shifts in human cells and in
Xenopus extracts could be obtained by treating Sf9 cells expressing CDC20 with the phosphatase inhibitor OA (Figure 2), a drug known to induce a subset of mitotic events. In APC binding and
activation assays, phosphorylated CDC20 from lysates of OA-treated Sf9
cells was able to associate with and to activate mitotic APC but had
little effect on interphase APC (Figure 3, A and C, reactions 4 and 9).
The amounts of phosphorylated CDC20 that remained bound to mitotic APC
and the degree of APC activation were similar to the behavior and
effects of nonphosphorylated CDC20 (Figure 3, A and C, reactions 7 and
9). To confirm these results further, we purified CDC20 from OA-treated
and nontreated Sf9 cells (Figure 5A) and
compared the ability of these proteins to activate mitotic and
interphase APC in dose-response experiments. As seen before, phosphorylated CDC20 was unable to stimulate interphase APC (Figure 5B), indicating that CDC20 phosphorylation is not sufficient for its
interaction with the APC. In contrast, mitotic APC was stimulated by
both phosphorylated and nonphosphorylated CDC20 (Figure 5C), with the
phosphorylated form of CDC20 being approximately twofold less active
than nonphosphorylated CDC20. We presently do not know whether the
apparent reduction of CDC20 activity by phosphorylation is
physiologically relevant or not, but in either case the data clearly
suggest that CDC20 phosphorylation does not stimulate APC activation in
vitro.
|
To test this conclusion further, we generated nonphosphorylatable CDC20
mutants by site-directed mutagenesis. Because it is not known on which
amino acid residues CDC20 is phosphorylated, we performed a
phosphopeptide analysis by using a combination of mass spectrometry
techniques. The bands representing the nonphosphorylated and the
phosphorylated forms of CDC20 were excised from a polyacrylamide gel
(Figure 5A) and trypsinized. Resulting peptides were measured by
matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization mass spectrometry but did not reveal significant differences (our unpublished results). Next, nanoelectrospray parent ion scans, which specifically measure phosphopeptides, were performed on a triple quadrupole mass
spectrometer. Only one candidate for a phosphopeptide was detected.
This peptide was then sequenced on a quadrupole time-of-flight
instrument, revealing serine 41 to be phosphorylated (Figure
6). By both nanoelectrospray and
matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization mass spectrometry, the nonphosphorylated form of the peptide was also found in the band
corresponding to the phosphoprotein indicating partial phosphorylation on this site.
|
To test whether phosphorylation on serine 41 is responsible for the electrophoretic mobility shift of mitotic CDC20, we generated a mutant in which this residue was changed to alanine (CDC20S41A). When 35S-labeled wild-type and mutant proteins were generated by in vitro translation and incubated in Xenopus egg extracts, CDC20S41A was still subject to a mitosis-specific mobility shift that was only slightly reduced compared with that of the wild-type protein (our unpublished results), suggesting that sites in addition to serine 41 can be phosphorylated in CDC20. However, in further mass spectrometry experiments using Lys-C digestion, which produces larger peptide fragments, and immobilized metal affinity columns, we were not able to retrieve other phosphopeptides.
Serine 41 is part of a sequence that matches the consensus sequence
S/T-P-X-K/R for phosphorylation by CDK1 (Figure 6), and we found that
in vitro Sf9 cell fractions containing vertebrate cyclin B/CDK1/p9
complexes were able to phosphorylate CDC20 and CDH1 (see Figure
8B) (our unpublished results). Together, these observations implicate
CDK1 in mitotic CDC20 phosphorylation. We therefore mutated seven
serine and threonine residues in CDC20 that are potential CDK1
phosphorylation sites to alanine residues, thereby creating the mutant
CDC20Ala (Figure
7A). In another mutant,
CDC20Asp, we changed the same sites to aspartate
residues with a view to creating a mutant that mimics the
phosphorylated state of CDC20. When in vitro translation products of
these proteins were incubated in Xenopus extracts, neither
CDC20Ala nor CDC20Asp was
subject to mitosis-specific electrophoretic mobility shifts (Figure
7B), indicating that they cannot be phosphorylated to the same degree
as wild-type CDC20. When we tested the abilities of the three forms of
CDC20 to activate interphase or mitotic APC, we found that none of the
CDC20 proteins had significant effects on the activity of interphase
APC, whereas both CDC20 wild-type and mutants could activate mitotic
APC (Figure 7C). Similar results were obtained when all three forms of
CDC20 were first incubated in mitotic Xenopus extracts
before APC activation assays were performed (Figure 7D), i.e., under
conditions in which CDC20wt is phosphorylated but
CDC20Ala is not (Figure 7B). These results
further suggest that mitotic CDC20 phosphorylation is not required for
APC activation. We noticed that a portion of the in vitro-translated
CDC20 proteins bound to antibody beads even in the absence of APC
(Figure 7F), i.e., nonspecifically, and therefore did not attempt to
quantitate the binding of the CDC20 proteins to APC in these
experiments.
|
Mitotic CDH1 Phosphorylation Prevents APC Activation
To test whether CDH1 phosphorylation inhibits its interaction with
the APC, as shown previously in yeast (Zachariae et al., 1998
; Jaspersen et al., 1999
), we first reinvestigated the
behavior of CDH1 in HeLa cells progressing through mitosis after
double-thymidine arrest and release. Previous experiments had shown
that the abundance of CDH1 transcripts increases as human cells enter
mitosis (Fang et al., 1998
), but no corresponding changes in
protein levels and no changes in protein mobility were detected (Fang
et al., 1998
; Kramer et al., 1998
). In contrast,
we observed that CDH1 levels first decreased as cells were released
from the thymidine arrest and then increased significantly as cells
entered mitosis [Figure 1C, CDH1 (short)]. The CDH1 levels began to
decrease again after 10.5 h, i.e., somewhat after cyclin B and
CDC20 proteolysis was initiated. CDH1 activity may therefore also be
regulated by changes in its abundance. Our CDH1 antibodies do not
recognize recombinant CDC20 (our unpublished results), and we can
therefore exclude that the variation in protein levels can be
attributed to CDC20 cross-reactivity. Instead, we suspect that changes
in CDH1 abundance may not have been observed before because of the inferior quality of the peptide antibodies used in previous experiments (Fang et al., 1998
; Kramer et al., 1998
). In
addition, it is possible that in some experiments CDH1 levels were
influenced by drug treatments as, for example, the G1 arrest induced by
lovastatin has been attributed recently in part to inhibition of the
proteasome (Rao et al., 1999
).
When larger amounts of proteins were analyzed by long immunoblot exposures, an additional slower-migrating phosphorylated form of CDH1 was reproducibly observed in extracts from cells in S, G2, and M phase but not in G1 extracts [Figure 1C, CDH1 (long)]. To test the functional relevance of this modification, we phosphorylated ectopically expressed CDH1 in Sf9 cells in vivo by treating cells with OA (Figure 2). The resulting phosphorylated CDH1 bound only poorly to interphase and mitotic APC, and its ability to stimulate APC activity was reduced compared with the effects of nonphosphorylated CDH1 (Figure 3, A and C, reactions 5 and 10), suggesting that phosphorylation decreases binding of CDH1 to the APC. This conclusion was supported by dose-response experiments that confirmed that phosphorylated CDH1 showed little activity in APC activation assays (Figure 5B).
To test the role of CDH1 phosphorylation further, we generated mutants
of CDH1 in which potential CDK1 phosphorylation sites were lacking.
Nine serine and threonine residues were either changed to alanine, or a
subset of eight of these residues was mutated to aspartate residues
(Figure 8A). As in their CDC20
counterparts, these mutations abolished the electrophoretic mobility
shifts that are observed when wild-type CDH1 is incubated in mitotic Xenopus extracts (Figure 8B, left). In APC activation
assays, in vitro-translated wild-type CDH1
(CDH1wt) and CDH1Ala were
able to stimulate the activity of interphase and mitotic APC (Figure
8C). In contrast, CDH1Asp could activate neither
form of the APC (Figure 8C), consistent with the possibility that this
mutant mimicks the phosphorylated form of CDH1. To test whether the
CDH1Ala mutant had lost the ability to be
inhibited by mitotic phosphorylation, we phosphorylated all three forms
of CDH1 by incubating them in fractions from Sf9 cells containing
ectopically expressed vertebrate cyclin B/CDK1/p9. This treatment
resulted in a mobility shift of CDH1wt that was
reduced in CDH1Asp and abolished in
CDH1Ala (Figure 8B, right). The kinase was
subsequently inhibited by addition of the inhibitor staurosporine, and
the CDH1 proteins were tested for their ability to activate interphase
or mitotic APC. Whereas cyclin B/CDK1/p9 inhibited the ability of
CDH1wt to activate either form of the APC, the
CDH1Ala mutant was resistant to this treatment
(Figure 8D). Similar results were obtained when the CDH1 proteins were
incubated in mitotic Xenopus extracts instead of being
treated with cyclin B/CDK1/p9 before their effects on APC were tested
(our unpublished results). These results suggest that mitotic CDH1
phosphorylation inhibits the ability of this protein to activate the
APC.
|
Analysis of CDC20 and CDH1 Mutants In Vivo
Our results from in vitro assays so far suggested that mitotic APC phosphorylation is required for assembly of APCCDC20, whereas the formation of APCCDH1 is inhibited by CDH1 phosphorylation. To test these conclusions in vivo, we transfected logarithmically growing HeLa cells with cDNAs encoding wild-type and mutant forms of CDC20 and CDH1 that are N-terminally tagged with GFP. At different times after the transfection, we isolated GFP-positive cells by FACS and analyzed the effects of CDH1/CDC20 expression on known APC substrates by immunoblotting.
Ectopic expression of CDH1Ala resulted in
significantly reduced levels of the mitotic cyclins A and B (Figure
9A) but not of cyclin E (our unpublished
results) that is not known to be an APC substrate.
CDH1Asp did not detectably influence cyclin A and
B levels, whereas CDH1wt expression resulted in a
small reduction of cyclin B at late time points (Figure 9A, 48 h
after transfection). These data are consistent with our in vitro data
showing that nonphosphorylatable CDH1 (CDH1Ala)
can constitutively activate the APC. To test whether the reduction of
cyclin levels by CDH1Ala and
CDH1wt expression was caused directly or
indirectly by ectopically formed APCCDH1
complexes, we analyzed the DNA contents of the transfected cells by
FACS (Figure 9B). This revealed a reduction in G2/M phase cells in the
population of cells transfected with CDH1Ala and
a corresponding increase in G1 cells. This result suggests that
constitutively active APCCDH1 may delay entry
into the cell cycle at the G1-S phase transition. Because cyclins are
unstable in the G1 phase, the effects of CDH1Ala
expression on cyclin levels may be both direct and indirect.
|
In contrast to the results obtained with CDH1, we could not detect any effects on either cyclin levels or cell cycle distribution of the transfected cells after the ectopic expression of wild-type and mutant CDC20 (Figure 9A) (our unpublished results). This result is consistent with our observation that CDC20 can only bind to mitotically phosphorylated APC that would only be present in a very small percentage of the cells analyzed in these experiments.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The separation of sister chromatids at the
metaphase-anaphase transition depends on activation of the APC by the
protein CDC20 (Dawson et al., 1995
; Sigrist et
al., 1995
; Visintin et al., 1997
; Shirayama et
al., 1998
). Because premature initiation of anaphase could lead to
the formation of aneuploid daughter cells, the activation of APC by
CDC20 has to be tightly controlled. Both CDC20 turnover and the spindle
assembly checkpoint contribute to the regulation of this event, but
neither of these mechanisms is sufficient to explain the mitotic
specificity of APCCDC20 activation. Our results
suggest that the mitotic phosphorylation of APC core subunits is
required to allow CDC20 to bind to the APC and to activate its
ubiquitination activity in vertebrate cells. Because ectopic
overexpression of CDC20 in logarithmically cycling human cells is not
sufficient to induce cyclin B proteolysis (Figure 9A), APC
phosphorylation may be a rate-limiting step for the assembly of active
APCCDC20 complexes. The proper timing of anaphase
may therefore not only depend on the previously observed accumulation
of CDC20 between S phase and mitosis and on completion of spindle
assembly but also on the activation of mitotic kinases that
phosphorylate APC subunits. These results may explain previous
observations that mitotic phosphorylation is required for high APC
activity (Lahav-Baratz et al., 1995
; Peters et
al., 1996
; Kotani et al., 1998
), although it is unclear
whether CDC20 was present in the previous experiments. Alternatively,
it remains possible that the phosphorylation of APC subunits has some
allosteric effects on APC activity that are independent of CDC20.
Previous work has implicated both Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) and cyclin
B/CDK1/p9 in APC phosphorylation (Lahav-Baratz et al., 1995
;
Kotani et al., 1998
; Patra and Dunphy, 1998
). In vertebrates both of these kinases are activated early during entry into mitosis, at
the same time or even slightly before the phosphatase CDC25 is
activated (Gautier et al., 1991
; Kumagai and Dunphy, 1996
). Our results show, however, that APC core phosphorylation occurs significantly after CDC25 and CDK1 activation, presumably in
prometaphase or metaphase (Figure 1E) (Vorlaufer and Peters, 1998
). It
will therefore be interesting to investigate whether other kinases have
a role in APC phosphorylation in vivo or whether a special lag phase
mechanism delays the ability of PLK1 and cyclin B/CDK1/p9 to recognize
APC subunits in mitosis. It will also be important to identify which of
the vertebrate APC subunits needs to be phosphorylated to allow CDC20
binding and whether this mechanism is conserved in other species, such
as yeast (to date, APC phosphorylation has been observed in fission
yeast [Yamada et al., 1997
] but not in budding yeast
[Jaspersen et al., 1999
]).
Three other articles have recently reported experiments that address
the activation of APC by CDC20, although with different conclusions.
Fang et al. (1998)
proposed that in vitro-translated CDC20
can activate Xenopus APC independent of the phosphorylation state of the APC. In contrast, Kotani et al. (1999)
found
that phosphorylation of CDC20, but not of the APC, is required for APC
activation. Again in contrast with these results, Shteinberg et
al. (1999)
reported recently (during preparation of this
manuscript) that in vitro-translated human Fizzy/CDC20 can only
activate the mitotically phosphorylated form of the clam cyclosome or
APC. Our data agree with the results of Shteinberg et al.
(1999)
, but we can only speculate why different conclusions were
reached by the other authors. One possibility is that some APC
phosphorylation occurred during the experiments of Fang et
al. (1998)
and of Kotani et al. (1999)
; for example,
the mitotic kinases used by Kotani et al. (1999)
to treat
CDC20 could have had direct effects on APC. Alternatively, it is
conceivable that the different sources of CDC20 used may have
contributed to the different results (Kotani et al. [1999]
used bacterially expressed CDC20 that presumably is devoid of any
phosphorylation, whereas we used CDC20 expressed in insect cells in
which noncell cycle-regulated modifications could occur).
We specifically tested whether mitotic CDC20 phosphorylation has a role
in APC activation, but even in careful dose-response experiments we
could not detect a stimulatory effect of CDC20 phosphorylation on APC
activation; CDC20 phosphorylation was neither sufficient to activate
interphase APC (Figure 5B) nor required to activate mitotic APC (Figure
5C). We confirmed these results by generating CDC20 mutants lacking
seven CDK1 consensus sites that we found to be as potent as wild-type
CDC20 in activating mitotic APC. Mass spectrometric analyses showed
that at least one of these sites is phosphorylated in vivo (Figure 6),
and we found that CDK1 can phosphorylate CDC20 in vitro (our
unpublished results), suggesting that the sites mutated by us are
physiologically relevant. We can nevertheless not exclude that CDC20
may in addition be phosphorylated on other residues that may be of
relevance, but we note that mutation of a similar set of CDK1 sites in
CDH1 did have strong effects on its regulation (see below). It
therefore remains to be seen whether CDC20 phosphorylation is required
for full APC activation under physiologic conditions or whether this modification may influence CDC20's ability to interact with other proteins, such as the checkpoint protein MAD2 that has been found to
interact specifically with the mitotic form of
APCCDC20 (Li et al., 1997
).
Previous work in yeast has shown that the late mitotic/G1-specific
activator of the APC, Hct1p/Cdh1p, is negatively regulated by
phosphorylation (Zachariae et al., 1998
; Jaspersen et
al., 1999
). Our results indicate that vertebrate CDH1 is regulated at least in part by the same mechanism, i.e., that phosphorylation of
CDH1 inhibits its ability to associate with the APC and to activate it.
In addition, our work suggests that CDH1 function may also be cell
cycle regulated by controlling the rates of CDH1 synthesis and/or
destruction. Together with the observation that human CDH1 is
phosphorylated in vivo from S phase until the end of mitosis but not in
G1 phase (Figure 1C), our results suggest that the ability of CDH1 to
activate the APC is inhibited from the G1-S transition until the end
of mitosis by CDH1 phosphorylation. Previous experiments in
Drosophila have shown that ectopic expression of cyclin E is
sufficient to stabilize APC substrates prematurely in G1, consistent
with the idea that cyclin E-dependent kinases may directly inhibit CDH1
by phosphorylation (Knoblich et al., 1994
). More recent
experiments suggest that cyclin A-dependent kinases have a similar
role in human cells (Lukas et al., 1999
). Interestingly,
ectopic expression of nonphosphorylatable CDH1 in logarithmically
cycling human cells caused a decrease in G2/M phase cells and a
corresponding increase in cells in G1 (Figure 9B). This observation
suggests that inactivation of APCCDH1 may be
required to allow entry into the cell cycle. According to this
hypothesis, APCCDH1 activity would contribute to
the length of the G1 phase by keeping the levels of S phase-activating
proteins low, a model that is consistent with the previous observation
that the expression of CDH1 correlates with the establishment of a G1
phase during early development of flies and frogs (Sigrist and Lehner,
1997
; Lorca et al., 1998
).
In budding yeast, APCCDC20 has been shown to be
specifically required for the initiation of anaphase by allowing the
destruction of the securin Pds1p, whereas APCCDH1
has an important role in the exit from mitosis by ubiquitinating the
mitotic cyclin Clb2p (Schwab et al., 1997
; Visintin et
al., 1997
; Shirayama et al., 1998
). Although it is not
known yet whether APCCDC20 and
APCCDH1 display similar substrate specificities
in other organisms, the budding yeast data have led to the idea that
the temporal order of APC activation by CDC20 and CDH1 is an important
mechanism that prevents exit from mitosis before anaphase has occurred. Genetic experiments in yeast suggest that activation of
APCCDH1 depends on the previous elimination of an
APCCDH1 inhibitor by
APCCDC20 (Yamamoto et al., 1996
; Lim
et al., 1998
). Good candidates for an
APCCDC20 substrate with this function are the
cyclin subunits of mitotic CDKs that could inactivate Hct1p/Cdh1p
directly as well as indirectly by inhibiting the phosphatase Cdc14p
(Shirayama et al., 1999
). Our results expand this model by
showing that mitotic kinases have directly antagonistic roles in
regulating CDC20 and CDH1; whereas mitotic APC phosphorylation is
required for activation of APCCDC20, stimulation
of the APC by CDH1 is simultaneously inhibited by the phosphorylation
of CDH1. This mechanism ensures that APCCDC20 can
only be activated under conditions (high-kinase levels) in which
APCCDH1 is inactive and may thus help to
guarantee the proper order of anaphase and exit from mitosis.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We are particularly grateful to C. Gieffers for a generous supply of CDC27 antibodies, to K. Paiha and P. Steinlein for help with the FACS, to E. Vorlaufer and I. Sumara for Xenopus extracts, to T. Hunt for Xenopus cyclin antibodies, and to B. Dunphy and D. Patra for CDK1, cyclin B, and p9 baculoviruses. We also thank J. Bartek, D. Bohmann, M. Brandeis, C. and. J. Lukas, K. Todokoro, W. Wunderlich, and members of the Peters lab for helpful discussions; K. Kaplan, L. Kahr, T. Bajari, and D. Solka for advice on baculovirus expression; K. Mechtler, S. Aigner, H. Auer, and G. Schaffner for technical help; A. Marchler-Bauer for secondary structure predictions; M. Glotzer for comments on this manuscript; and H. Tkadletz and S. Hauf for graphics. This work was supported by grant FFF 3/12801 from the Austrian Industrial Research Promotion Fund to J.-M.P.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Corresponding author. E-mail
address: peters{at}nt.imp.univie.ac.at.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|