![]() |
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vol. 13, Issue 10, 3560-3575, October 2002
Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710
Submitted May 16, 2002; Accepted July 16, 2002| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Swe1p, the sole Wee1-family kinase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, is synthesized during late G1 and is then degraded as cells proceed through the cell cycle. However, Swe1p degradation is halted by the morphogenesis checkpoint, which responds to insults that perturb bud formation. The Swe1p stabilization promotes cell cycle arrest through Swe1p-mediated inhibitory phosphorylation of Cdc28p until the cells can recover from the perturbation and resume bud formation. Swe1p degradation involves the relocalization of Swe1p from the nucleus to the mother-bud neck, and neck targeting requires the Swe1p-interacting protein Hsl7p. In addition, Swe1p degradation is stimulated by its substrate, cyclin/Cdc28p, and Swe1p is thought to be a target of the ubiquitin ligase SCFMet30 acting with the ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme Cdc34p. The basis for regulation of Swe1p degradation by the morphogenesis checkpoint remains unclear, and in order to elucidate that regulation we have dissected the Swe1p degradation pathway in more detail, yielding several novel findings. First, we show here that Met30p (and by implication SCFMet30) is not, in fact, required for Swe1p degradation. Second, cyclin/Cdc28p does not influence Swe1p neck targeting, but can directly phosphorylate Swe1p, suggesting that it acts downstream of neck targeting in the Swe1p degradation pathway. Third, a screen for functional but nondegradable mutants of SWE1 identified two small regions of Swe1p that are key to its degradation. One of these regions mediates interaction of Swe1p with Hsl7p, showing that the Swe1p-Hsl7p interaction is critical for Swe1p neck targeting and degradation. The other region did not appear to affect interactions with known Swe1p regulators, suggesting that other as-yet-unknown regulators exist.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Yeast cells deploy a panoply of stress responses
to adapt to changes in environmental conditions. Stress responses often
involve transient depolarization of the actin cytoskeleton (Chowdhury et al., 1992
; Delley and Hall, 1999
) in addition to changes
in gene expression (Gasch et al., 2000
). Bud formation
requires a polarized actin cytoskeleton, so that during some stress
responses bud formation is temporarily halted. This in turn triggers
cell cycle arrest in G2 through the morphogenesis checkpoint (Lew and Reed, 1995
; McMillan et al., 1998
). The cell cycle arrest is
enacted by Swe1p, the sole Wee1-family kinase in S. cerevisiae (Sia et al., 1996
).
Swe1p blocks entry into mitosis through inhibitory phosphorylation of a
conserved tyrosine residue, Y19, in the cyclin-dependent kinase Cdc28p
(Booher et al., 1993
). Cdc28p Y19 phosphorylation occurs at
low basal levels in unstressed cells, but rises dramatically in
response to actin perturbation (Harrison et al., 2001
). This response involves at least two pathways: one blocks degradation of
Swe1p (Sia et al., 1998
), whereas another appears to inhibit Mih1p, the Cdc25-family phosphatase that dephosphorylates Cdc28p at Y19
(Harrison et al., 2001
).
Several factors have been shown to participate in targeting Swe1p for
degradation in unstressed cells. Met30p is an F-box protein that forms
part of an SCF ubiquitin ligase, and Swe1p degradation is blocked in
temperature-sensitive met30 mutants, suggesting that
SCFMet30 directs Swe1p ubiquitination and
consequent destruction (Kaiser et al., 1998
). Swe1p
degradation also requires the presence of active Clb1p-4p/Cdc28p
complexes, suggesting the presence of a feedback loop whereby
Swe1p-dependent inhibition of Cdc28p causes stabilization and
consequent accumulation of Swe1p (Sia et al., 1998
).
Finally, Swe1p degradation requires Hsl1p, a Nim1-family protein
kinase, and Hsl7p, a methyltransferase that binds directly to both
Swe1p and Hsl1p (Ma et al., 1996
; Barral et al.,
1999
; McMillan et al., 1999a
; Shulewitz et al.,
1999
; Lee et al., 2000
; Cid et al., 2001
).
When it is first synthesized during late G1, Swe1p accumulates
predominantly in the nucleus. After bud emergence, a subset of the
Swe1p is targeted to the bud side of the mother-bud neck in a
septin-dependent manner (Longtine et al., 2000
). Cells
lacking either Hsl1p or Hsl7p fail to target Swe1p to the neck and fail to degrade Swe1p, suggesting a link between Swe1p neck localization and
its degradation (McMillan et al., 1999a
; Longtine et
al., 2000
). Our current hypothesis is that Swe1p cycles between
the nucleus and the cytoplasm, and that while Swe1p transits through the cytoplasm, it can be delivered by Hsl7p to the neck, where it
becomes marked for destruction. It is not clear exactly how Swe1p
becomes marked for destruction, but an obvious possibility is that
after neck targeting Swe1p is phosphorylated by neck-resident kinases,
in a manner that promotes its subsequent recognition by
SCFMet30, which catalyzes Swe1p ubiquitination
leading to proteosomal degradation. Candidate neck-localized kinases
include Hsl1p (Barral et al., 1999
) and the polo-like kinase
Cdc5p (Song et al., 2000
), which also interacts with Swe1p
(Bartholomew et al., 2001
).
Many aspects of the scheme outlined above are still quite speculative.
In this report, we have examined some aspects of the pathway in more
detail. In particular, we found that Met30p was dispensable for Swe1p
degradation, that Clb/Cdc28p acts at a step after neck targeting in the
Swe1p degradation pathway, and that Clb/Cdc28p directly phosphorylates
Swe1p in vitro. We also conducted a screen for functional but
nondegradable mutant alleles of SWE1. The 39 mutants
emerging from that screen consistently altered just two very small
regions of Swe1p, defining Swe1p determinants that are critical for its
regulated degradation. One of these determinants was required for
effective interaction of Swe1p with Hsl7p, and our analysis strongly
supports the importance of Hsl7p interaction and neck targeting in
Swe1p degradation. Surprisingly, however, mutations in the other
determinant blocked Swe1p degradation without impairing the interaction
of Swe1p with any of its known regulators, suggesting that
as-yet-unknown factors must also contribute to Swe1p degradation.
Because degradation of Wee1-family kinases is also regulated by
checkpoints in other species (Michael and Newport, 1998
; Raleigh and
O'Connell, 2000
) and the known factors controlling Swe1p degradation
are all highly conserved, our findings may have broad applicability to
cell cycle control in eukaryotes.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Yeast Strains and Plasmids
Standard genetic and molecular biology methods were used to
generate all strains and plasmids used in this study. The yeast strains
used are listed in Table 1. The
oligonucleotides used are listed in Table
2.
|
|
The previously described GAL1:MIH1:TRP1 and
SWE1myc:URA3 (McMillan et al., 1998
),
swe1::LEU2 (Booher et al., 1993
),
CDC28Y19F:TRP1 and
GAL-SIC1::LEU2 (Sia et al., 1998
),
GAL1-HSL7:LEU2, SWE1myc:TRP1, and
SWE1myc:HIS2 (McMillan et al., 1999a
),
hsl7
URA3 (Ma et al., 1996
),
HSL7-3HA:kan (Longtine et al., 2000
), and
met4::kanr and
met30::kanr (Kaiser et
al., 2000
) alleles were introduced into yeast by direct transformation. The alleles swe1
LEU2 (primers
OJ43 and OJ44, deleting the entire open reading frame (ORF) of
SWE1 except the first and last 23 codons) and
hsl7
kanr (primers OJ180 and
OJ181, deleting the entire HSL7 ORF) were introduced into
yeast by a PCR knockout strategy (Wach, 1996
), using the templates
pRS304 (Sikorski and Hieter, 1989
) and pFA6a-kanMX6 (Wach, 1996
), respectively.
Strain DLY5473 was made by introducing the
SWE1myc:URA3 allele into strain JAU01 (Bishop et
al., 2000
), a kind gift from J. Ubersax and D. Morgan (University
of California, San Francisco, CA).
The construction of several integrating plasmids containing a variety of SWE1 alleles is described below. All of the URA3-marked alleles were integrated at the ura3 locus by transformation with the relevant StuI-digested plasmids, and all of the TRP1-marked alleles were integrated at the trp1 locus by transformation with the relevant Bsu36I-digested plasmids.
Construction of Plasmids Used for SWE1 Mutant Screens
The recipient "gapped" plasmids used for the mutant screens
had a pRS316 (Sikorski and Hieter, 1989
) backbone (CEN URA3)
carrying "gapped" versions of the previously described
SWE1myc allele that contains a single HA tag and 12 tandem
myc tags at the end of the SWE1 coding sequence (McMillan
et al., 1998
). The gapped plasmid for the N-terminal screen
(pJM1065) was missing sequences from codon 1 to codon 496, and the
gapped plasmid for the C-terminal screen (pJM1069) was missing
sequences from codon 417 to codon 819 of the 819-codon SWE1
ORF. These plasmids were constructed by replacing the relevant section
of SWE1 with a PCR-generated LEU2 cassette
flanked by AscI sites, as described below. Digestion of
these plasmids with AscI then yielded the gapped plasmids
used for the screens.
First, the PstI/BamHI fragment containing
SWE1myc from YIplac204SWE1myc (McMillan et al.,
1999a
) was subcloned into pBLUESCRIPT-KS (Stratagene, La Jolla,
CA) to make pJM1068, and then subcloned using
XhoI/BamHI into pRS316 (Sikorski and Hieter,
1989
) to make pJM1062. The KpnI site in the pJM1062 multiple
cloning site was then destroyed by partial digestion with
KpnI, blunt ending, and religation to make pJM1064 (in which
the KpnI site within SWE1 is now unique). Both
pJM1062 and pJM1064 are therefore CEN URA3 plasmids
expressing full-length SWE1myc from its own promoter.
A gap repair strategy was then used to replace sections of
SWE1 in the above plasmids with the LEU2
cassette. LEU2 was amplified by PCR using pRS305 (Sikorski
and Hieter, 1989
) as template and the primers OJ110 and OJ111 (for the
N-terminal replacement) or OJ112 and OJ114 (for the C-terminal
replacement). OJ110 and OJ111 introduce terminal sequences homologous
to bases
31 to
1 (5' end) and 1487-1516 (3' end) of
SWE1 (where +1 is the first base of the ORF), whereas OJ112
and OJ114 introduce terminal sequences homologous to bases 1249-1278
(5' end) of SWE1 and to the HA tag (3' end). pJM1062 was
digested with BglII, creating a gap within the N-terminal
half of SWE1, and the gapped plasmid was cotransformed into
yeast together with the first PCR LEU2 cassette above. Gap repair by homologous recombination yielded pJM1065, in which the first
496 codons of SWE1 are replaced by the LEU2
cassette. pJM1064 was digested with KpnI, creating a gap
within the C-terminal half of SWE1, and the gapped plasmid
was cotransformed into yeast together with the second PCR
LEU2 cassette above. Gap repair by homologous recombination
yielded pJM1069, in which the last 402 codons of SWE1 are
replaced by the LEU2 cassette.
Construction of a New SWE1-12myc Allele
The SWE1myc allele described above contains a single
HA tag between the end of the SWE1 coding sequence and the
12 tandem myc tags (McMillan et al., 1998
). We constructed a
new 12myc-tagged version of SWE1, designated
SWE1-12myc, that does not have an HA tag between
SWE1 and the myc tags but is otherwise identical to the
earlier SWE1myc allele. The sequence at the end of
SWE1 in the new allele is:
5'-AAGCCAAAATTTTTTGTCGACGGTGAACAAAAGTTGATTTCTGAAGAAGATTTGAAC-3', encoding the peptide KPKFFVDGEQKLISEEDLN. The italicized
SalI site delineates the boundary between the end of
SWE1 and the first myc tag.
The construction of the SWE1-12myc allele was performed as
follows. First, a LEU2 PCR cassette amplified as described
above using primers OJ113 and OJ114 was cotransformed into yeast with KpnI-digested pJM1064, replacing the final 59 codons of
SWE1 with the LEU2 cassette by homologous
recombination, yielding pJM1070. Digestion with AscI and
religation then removed the cassette, yielding pJM1071. An
EcoRV/BamHI fragment from pJM1071 containing the
truncated SWE1 and epitope tag sequences was cloned into the XhoI(blunt)/BamHI sites of pRS306 (Sikorski and
Hieter, 1989
) to make pJM1072. A PCR product fusing the final 90 codons
of SWE1 to myc tag sequences (without an intervening HA tag)
was generated using YIplac204SWE1myc (McMillan et al.,
1999b
) as template and primers OJ167 and OJ175, and cotransformed into
yeast with AscI-digested pJM1071, restoring the C-terminal
SWE1 sequences now fused directly to myc tags via a
SalI site by homologous recombination, yielding pJM1091.
However, the PCR amplification led to deletion of some of the myc tags.
To generate the final SWE1--12myc allele, a
HindIII/SalI fragment from pJM1091
containing the C-terminal half of SWE1 was ligated into the
corresponding sites in pJM1072, yielding pJM1102 (full-length
SWE1-12myc under control of the SWE1 promoter in an integrating URA3-marked plasmid). A similar
TRP1-marked plasmid, pJM1115, was constructed by cloning a
PstI/BamHI fragment from pJM1102 containing the
SWE1-12myc allele into the corresponding sites in pRS304.
Finally, a URA3-marked integrating plasmid expressing the
SWE1-12myc allele from the GAL1 promoter,
pJM1101, was constructed by cloning a
HindIII/SalI C-terminal fragment of
SWE1 from pJM1091 into the corresponding sites of pDLB955,
the plasmid used to make the SWE1myc allele in strain RSY206
(McMillan et al., 1998
).
Construction of the SWE1
1 Allele
The SWE1
1 allele was constructed by a three-way
homologous recombination strategy. Two overlapping SWE1 PCR
products, containing the
1 mutation in the overlapping region, were
made using YIplac204SWE1myc (McMillan et al., 1999a
) as
template and primer pairs OJ121 + OJ150 and OJ122 + OJ151. These
products were cotransformed with BglII-digested pJM1062 into
yeast, yielding pJM1139, a CEN URA3-marked plasmid
expressing SWE1
1myc (lacking the sequences
coding for R318 to K328) from the SWE1 promoter. The allele
was transferred to SWE1 promoter-regulated (pJM1096) and
GAL1 promoter-regulated (pJM1099) integrating
URA3-marked plasmids by subcloning a
HindIII/SalI SWE1
1 fragment from
pJM1139 into the corresponding sites of pJM1072 and pDLB955, respectively.
To generate versions of SWE1
1 containing the new 12myc
epitope tag (above), the ClaI/SalI
SWE1 fragment from pJM1091 (see above) was used to replace
the corresponding fragment in pJM1096 (SWE1
1myc) and pJM1099
(GAL1-SWE1
1myc), yielding pJM1103
(SWE1
1-12myc) and pJM1104 (GAL1-
SWE1
1-12myc). A similar TRP1-marked
plasmid, pJM1116, was constructed by cloning a
PstI/BamHI fragment from pJM1103 containing the
SWE1
1-12myc allele into the corresponding sites in pRS304.
Construction of the SWE1E797K, SWE1I806T, and SWE1Q807R Alleles
The plasmids pJM1165 (E797K), pJM1162 (I806T), and pJM1164 (Q807R) were isolated from the PCR mutagenesis screen and were used as templates for subsequent PCR manipulations. PCR products containing SWE1E797K, SWE1I806T, and SWE1Q807R were amplified using the primers OJ167 and OJ175 and cotransformed into yeast together with AscI-digested pJM1071, yielding pJM1142 (SWE1E797K-12myc), pJM1143 (SWE1I806T-12myc), and pJM1141 (SWE1Q807R-12myc). The presence of the desired mutations (and absence of other mutations) was confirmed by sequencing. Integrating URA3-marked plasmids with these alleles were generated by subcloning ClaI/SalI fragments containing the mutations into the corresponding sites in pJM1102 (SWE1-12myc) or pJM1101 (GAL1-SWE1-12myc), yielding pJM1113 (SWE1E797K-12myc:URA3), pJM1112 (SWE1Q807R-12myc:URA3), and pJM1109 (GAL1-SWE1I806T-12myc:URA3). Similar TRP1-marked plasmids were constructed by transferring the SWE1-containing PstI/BamHI fragments from pJM1113 and pJM1112 into the corresponding sites in pRS304, yielding pJM1123 (SWE1E797K-12myc:TRP1) and pJM1122 (SWE1Q807R-12myc:TRP1).
Construction of the SWE1-NES Alleles
A pair of "forced-localization" NES cassettes encoding two
NES motifs (active, NES-A; inactive, NES-I) separated by a T7 epitope tag were previously described (Edgington and Futcher, 2001
). These cassettes were introduced in between the Swe1p C terminus and a 12-myc
epitope tag by an overlap PCR strategy. Sequences encoding a C-terminal
fragment of Swe1p were amplified using pDLB955 as template and primers
OCT22 and OCT23, and the forced-localization cassettes were amplified
using primers OCT24 and OCT25. Overlap PCR using these fragments as
template and primers OCT22 and OCT25 yielded products encoding the
C-terminal part of Swe1p fused in frame to the NES cassettes. This
product was digested with KpnI and SalI and
cloned into the corresponding sites in pDLB955, yielding pDLB1735
(GAL1-SWE1-NES-A-12myc:URA3) and pDLB1736
(GAL1-SWE1-NES-I-12myc:URA3). ClaI/SalI fragments from these plasmids were
subcloned into the corresponding sites in pJM1102 (above), yielding
pJM1105 (SWE1-NES-A-12myc:URA3) and pJM1106
(SWE1-NES-I-12myc:URA3) driven from the SWE1
promoter. PstI/BamHI fragments from these
plasmids were then subcloned into the corresponding sites in pRS304,
yielding pJM1117 (SWE1-NES-A-12myc:TRP1) and pJM1118
(SWE1-NES-I-12myc:TRP1).
To generate similar NES-containing versions of SWE1
1, we
performed a similar set of subcloning manipulations using pJM1103 (SWE1
1-12myc) and pRS306 instead of pJM1102
and pRS304 above, yielding pJM1107
(SWE1
1-NES-A-12myc:URA3), pJM1108
(SWE1
1-NES-I-12myc:URA3), pJM1119
(SWE1
1-NES-A-12myc:TRP1), and pJM1120
(SWE1
1-NES-I-12myc:TRP1).
Construction of Truncated SWE1myc Alleles
N- or C-terminally truncated derivatives of SWE1 were
generated by a two-step strategy. In the first step, internal
SWE1 sequences between a pair of selected restriction sites
in pBLB955 (GAL1-SWE1myc) were replaced by annealed
oligonucleotides with sticky ends compatible with the relevant sites
and containing a common core sequence (SalI site,
BamHI site, and start codon in a good Kozak context: 5'-GTCGACTGAGGATCCAAGATG-3', start codon in bold face). The
oligonucleotides are listed in Table 2: TSS1 and TSS2 replaced the
internal BglII-ClaI fragment, TSS3 and TSS4
replaced the internal ClaI-KpnI fragment, TSS5
and TSS6 replaced the internal EcoRI-KpnI fragment, and TSS7 and TSS8 replaced the internal
HindIII-EcoRI fragment. To generate Swe1p
fragments lacking N-terminal sequences, BamHI fragments
excised from these constructs were cloned into the BamHI
site in the GAL1-promoter vector YIpG2 (Stueland et al., 1993
), yielding plasmids promoting galactose-inducible
expression of myc-tagged Swe1p 311-819 (from the EcoRI
site), Swe1p 511-819 (from the ClaI site), and Swe1p
757-819 (from the KpnI site). Plasmids were digested with
HpaI to target integration at the leu2 locus. To
generate Swe1p fragments lacking C-terminal sequences, the constructs
were digested with SalI, gel purified, and religated to
circularize the plasmids, removing sequences between the
SalI site in the oligonucleotides and the SalI at
the beginning of the myc tag sequences, yielding plasmids promoting
galactose-inducible expression of myc-tagged Swe1p 1-123 (up to the
BglII site), Swe1p 1-250 (up to the HindIII
site), Swe1p 1-310 (up to the EcoRI site), and Swe1p 1-510
(up to the ClaI site). Plasmids were digested with
StuI to target integration at the ura3 locus.
Two-hybrid Strains and Plasmids
Two-hybrid analysis was performed with the base strain PJ69-4A
as described (James et al., 1996
). The "bait" (DNA
binding domain) vector was pOBD.CYH (Drees et al., 2001
) and
the "prey" (transcriptional activation domain) vector was pGAD424
(James et al., 1996
). Wild-type SWE1 was cloned
into pOBD.CYH, yielding pMOS166, as described (Drees et al.,
2001
). To introduce SWE1Q807R into
pOBD.CYH, pMOS166 was digested with KpnI and SalI
(generating a "gap" at the 3' end of SWE1 spanning the
sequence of the mutation) and cotransformed into strain DLY4033
together with a SWE1Q807R PCR product
generated in two PCR steps using pJM1112
(SWE1Q807R-12myc:URA3, described
above) as template. The first step used primers OJ119 and OJ207, and
the product was then reamplified using primers OJ119 and BD70R to
introduce 3' sequences homologous to the MCS region of pMOS166 to
enhance recombination during the gap repair.
A plasmid (pDLB2191) containing a partial CDC5 ORF (base
1265 to the end, encoding both "polo boxes" but not the kinase
domain of Cdc5p) in the prey vector pGAD-C1 (James et al.,
1996
) was identified in a two-hybrid screen using pMOS166 as bait. The
plasmid (YF306) containing full-length CLB2 in the prey
vector pGAD-C2 (James et al., 1996
) was a kind gift from
Fred Cross (Rockefeller University, NY).
GST-HSL7 Expression Plasmid
To express GST-Hsl7p in E. coli, we first cloned
sequences encoding the entire HSL7 ORF plus 400 base pairs
downstream as a NdeI-SacI fragment into the
corresponding sites in pUNI-10 (Liu et al., 1998
). The gene
was then excised as an EcoRI-SacI fragment and
cloned into the corresponding sites of pGEX-KG (Pharmacia, Piscataway,
NJ), yielding pDLB2211.
Screen for SWE1 Mutants
Two SWE1 PCR products were generated under mutagenic
conditions using Taq DNA polymerase in the presence of 0.2 mM MnCl2 with 2.5 mM dGTP, 2.5 mM dTTP, 0.5 mM
dATP, and 0.5 mM dCTP. The PCR template was YIplac204SWE1myc (McMillan
et al., 1999a
). The PCR primers OJ117 and OJ118 were used to
amplify an N-terminal section of SWE1 extending from 147 bases upstream of the start codon to base 1643 (codon 548) of
SWE1, which was cotransformed into yeast strain JMY1628
together with AscI-digested pJM1065. The primers OJ148 and
OJ149 were used to amplify a C-terminal section of SWE1 extending from base 1144 (codon 382) of SWE1 to the
downstream epitope tag, which was cotransformed into yeast strain
JMY1628 together with AscI-digested pJM1069. Homologous
recombination between the mutagenized PCR products and these gapped
plasmids regenerates full-length SWE1myc mutants.
The recipient strain, JMY1628, contains a GAL1:MIH1 allele, resulting in high levels of MIH1 expression on galactose-containing medium but no expression of MIH1 on glucose containing medium. Transformants containing successfully gap-repaired plasmids were selected on galactose medium lacking uracil, and after incubation for 3 d at 30°C, colonies were replica-plated to plates with dextrose medium lacking uracil. After one more day at 30°C, individual colonies were visually examined under a dissecting microscope to identify those that arrested with elongated buds on dextrose but not on galactose medium. Plasmids rescued from the colonies meeting these criteria were retransformed into JMY1628 to confirm that the plasmid was responsible for the phenotype. Plasmids passing this second round of screening were sequenced within the mutagenized region.
Cell Cycle Synchrony, Immunofluorescence, and Microscopy
Cells were synchronized in G1 by pheromone arrest (incubation of
MATa bar1 cells growing exponentially in YEPG
(1% yeast extract, 2% bacto-peptone, 2% galactose, 0.01% adenine) at 24°C with 100 ng/ml
-factor for 4 h, after which >90% of
cells were arrested) and release (cells were harvested by
centrifugation, washed once in YEPG, and resuspended in fresh YEPG at
37°C). To visualize the nuclei, aliquots of cells were fixed with 2 volumes of 95% ethanol, washed with H2O, and
then resuspended in 0.2 µg/ml 4',6'-diamidino-2-phenylindole in
H2O.
Immunofluorescence localization of Swe1p-myc was performed using a
four-antibody sandwich technique as described (Longtine et
al., 2000
). Cells were viewed on a Axioscope (Carl Zeiss, Inc., Thornwood, NY) equipped with epifluorescence and Nomarski optics and
images were captured with a cooled charge-coupled device camera (Princeton Instruments, Princeton, NJ). Microscopic images of whole
yeast colonies were similarly captured.
Biochemical Procedures
Procedures for harvesting and lysis of yeast cells, SDS-PAGE,
immunoprecipitation, immunoblotting, and pulse-chase
analysis of Swe1p stability were as described (McMillan et
al., 1999a
). Procedures for harvesting and lysis of bacterial
cells and purification of GST-tagged proteins were as described
(McMillan et al., 1999b
; Bose et al., 2001
).
Binding assays to assess binding of Swe1p to GST-Hsl7p were performed
by incubating 250 µg of yeast lysate from strains expressing
myc-tagged Swe1p (wild-type or mutant) together with excess (~40
µg/sample) GST or GST-Hsl7p immobilized on glutathione beads for 30 min at 4°C. Beads were washed with NP40 wash buffer (Bose et
al., 2001
) three times before analysis by SDS-PAGE and
immunoblotting. Kinase assays to assess Swe1p phosphorylation by GST-Cdc28p/Clb2p complexes were performed as described (McMillan et al., 1999b
) except that Swe1p-myc
beads (immunoprecipitated from 2 mg of yeast lysate and washed with reaction buffer) were added instead of histone H1 as substrate and the
reaction was extended to 2 h at 30°C with 25 µCi
-32P-ATP in each sample. After exposure of
dried gels to film, the radioactive Swe1p bands were excised and
subjected to partial proteolysis by 50 ng V8 protease, and the
resulting peptides were separated on a 12.5% polyacrylamide gel
containing 1 mM EDTA (Cleveland et al., 1977
).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Role of Met30p in Swe1p Degradation
We previously reported that temperature-sensitive
met30-6 mutants blocked both Swe1p degradation in vivo and
Swe1p ubiquitination in vitro, suggesting a direct role for
SCFMet30 in targeting Swe1p for degradation
(Kaiser et al., 1998
). We initially wanted to examine Swe1p
localization in met30 mutants to determine whether neck
targeting was affected. Recent studies have established that the
lethality of the met30 mutant is due to its failure to
downregulate the transcription factor Met4p (Patton et al.,
2000
). Thus, met30
met4
cells are viable
(albeit auxotrophic for methionine) and are therefore ideal to assess the in vivo role of Met30p in Swe1p degradation. Swe1p localization in
met30
met4
cells was indistinguishable from
that in wild-type cells (Figure 1A).
However, we were surprised to find that met30
met4
mutants did not display significantly elevated
levels of Swe1p compared with wild-type cells even in cells undergoing
mitosis (see Figure 1 legend). Also unexpectedly, we found that
met30
met4
mutants proliferated normally
and did not display elongated buds even when Mih1p was eliminated
(Figure 1B). These results prompted us to reexamine the requirement of
Met30p for Swe1p degradation, using the met30
met4
strain. Pulse-chase analysis showed that Swe1p
stability was similar in wild-type and met30
met4
cells (Figure 1, C and D), indicating that Met30p is
not in fact required to target Swe1p for degradation. In this
experiment the pulse-chase was performed after a shift to 37°C, so
that the results would be directly comparable to those we obtained
previously with met30-6 mutants (Kaiser et al.,
1998
). We conclude that the stabilization of Swe1p in
met30-6 mutants is indirect, mediated through some action of
Met4p.
|
If Met30p is not the ubiquitin ligase responsible for the Swe1p
polyubiquitination observed previously, then what is? We reasoned that
strains unable to degrade Swe1p should contain elevated levels of
Cdc28p Y19 phosphorylation, which can be monitored using a phospho-specific antibody (McMillan et al., 1999b
). We
examined Cdc28p Y19 phosphorylation in strains carrying deletions of
each of the 13 genes encoding nonessential F-box proteins. In parallel control strains, swe1
mutants exhibited no detectable
Cdc28p phosphorylation, whereas mih1
and
hsl1
strains showed significantly elevated Cdc28p
phosphorylation, as expected (Figure 1E). However, none of the F-box
mutants displayed elevated Cdc28p phosphorylation (Figure 1E). We have
also epitope-tagged Swe1p in all but three of those strains, but unlike
parallel hsl1
controls none of these strains accumulated
excess Swe1p (unpublished data). Assuming that all of these
strains (obtained via Research Genetics, Inc. from the genome knockout
collection) were correctly constructed, the simplest conclusion from
this panel is that Swe1p degradation does not require any single
nonessential F-box protein.
Role of Clb/Cdc28p in Swe1p Degradation
It is unclear how the requirement for Clb/Cdc28p activity in Swe1p
degradation fits into the Swe1p degradation pathway. Phosphorylation of
Hsl7p, as detected by a mobility shift of the protein upon SDS-PAGE,
occurs in a cell-cycle-regulated manner, from late G1 until telophase
(McMillan et al., 1999a
), perhaps suggesting that Clb/Cdc28p
contributes to some aspect of Hsl1p/7p function. Alternatively, Clb/Cdc28p might be required for a separate step in Swe1p degradation, after Swe1p neck targeting by Hsl1p and Hsl7p. To distinguish between
these possibilities, we examined the consequences of overexpressing the
Clb/Cdc28p inhibitor Sic1p. The Hsl7p mobility shift provides a
convenient indicator of events at the neck, because it is dependent both on Hsl1p kinase activity and on intact septins (our unpublished data). However, we found that the Hsl7p mobility shift was unaffected by Sic1p (Figure 2A) and that Swe1p was
still targeted to the neck in cells overexpressing Sic1p (Figure 2B).
In both of these experiments the cells arrested with a single nucleus
and one or more elongated buds (see Figure 2B inset), indicating that
sufficient Sic1p had been made to effectively inhibit Clb/Cdc28p. These
findings suggest that Clb/Cdc28p is not required for the aspects of
Hsl1p/7p function that we are able to monitor and that Clb/Cdc28p acts after neck targeting in the Swe1p degradation pathway.
|
Swe1p Phosphorylation by Clb/Cdc28p
In other organisms, cyclin/Cdc2 directly phosphorylates Wee1 at
multiple sites (Dunphy, 1994
), suggesting the simple hypothesis that
Clb/Cdc28p directly phosphorylates Swe1p in order to target Swe1p for
degradation. Consistent with this hypothesis, we found that Swe1p was
readily phosphorylated by Clb2p/Cdc28p in vitro (Figure
3A), and partial digestion of
Clb/Cdc28p-phosphorylated Swe1p by V8 protease revealed a complex
pattern of phospho-peptides (Figure 3B). In addition, much of the Swe1p
in vivo phosphorylation that we detected as a gel mobility shift of
Swe1p isolated from yeast cells was eliminated after Cdc28p inhibition
(Figure 3C; similar findings were first described by S. Harvey and D. Kellogg, personal communication). Moreover, Swe1p interacted with Clb2p in the two-hybrid assay (Figure 3D; first described by F. Cross, personal communication), although it is not clear whether this interaction reflects the propensity of Swe1p to phosphorylate Clb2p/Cdc28p, or the propensity of Clb2p/Cdc28p to phosphorylate Swe1p,
or both. In summary, it is very likely that Clb/Cdc28p phosphorylates
Swe1p in S. cerevisiae.
|
In the course of these studies we noticed that Swe1p isolated from
hsl1
cells was also a good substrate of Clb2p/Cdc28p in vitro (Figure 3A) and that partial digestion of this phosphoprotein with V8 protease yielded a spectrum of phosphopeptides identical to
that seen with Swe1p from wild-type cells (Figure 3B). Thus, it would
appear that the phosphorylation of Swe1p by Cdc28p in vitro does not
require prior Swe1p neck targeting.
Identification of Stabilized Mutants of SWE1
Given what we know about the Swe1p degradation pathway, we expected that the Swe1p polypeptide would harbor multiple determinants important for Swe1p degradation, including elements that promote Swe1p nuclear export, Swe1p neck targeting, Swe1p phosphorylation, and Swe1p ubiquitination. To identify such presumed determinants, we sought to isolate SWE1 mutants that were functional but escaped degradation.
The phosphatase Mih1p effectively counteracts Swe1p-mediated Cdc28p
inhibition, even when Swe1p is stabilized (McMillan et al.,
1999a
). However, in mih1
strains Swe1p stabilization
causes G2 arrest associated with the development of characteristically elongated buds (McMillan et al., 1999a
). To identify
stabilized mutants of Swe1p, we generated SWE1 mutants using
error-prone PCR and screened for mutants that caused G2 arrest in a
strain that did not express MIH1 (see MATERIALS AND METHODS
for details).
We performed two separate screens targeting overlapping N- or
C-terminal portions of Swe1p. The phenotypes of representative mutants
are illustrated in Figure 4A. Plasmids
were recovered from the selected colonies and retransformed into the
starting strain to confirm that the phenotype was due to the mutant
SWE1. Plasmids yielding a reproducible G2 arrest on dextrose
medium (14 from the N-terminal screen and 25 from the C-terminal
screen) were sequenced, revealing that most mutants contained multiple changes, as expected for error-prone PCR. Strikingly, however, all 14 of the mutants from the N-terminal screen contained at least one change
within a 13-residue stretch (320-LTNSLQQFKDDLY-332) upstream of the
catalytic domain (Figure 4B). Moreover, all 25 of the mutants from the
C-terminal screen contained an alteration at one of three residues
(E797, I806, or Q807) near the very C terminus of Swe1p (Figure 4B). We
constructed clean single mutants with these changes and confirmed that
they were responsible for the mutant phenotype (see Figure 4 legend).
In addition, we constructed a mutant deleting residues 318-328 in the
N-terminal domain, and this mutant (Swe1p
1)
behaved similarly to the others (Figure 4A). Thus, the mutants highlight two small regions that are required for Swe1p downregulation but not for Swe1p function.
|
In principle, these mutants could encode either more stable or more
active versions of Swe1p. To ask directly whether the mutants encoded
stabilized forms of Swe1p, we performed pulse-chase assays on
representative mutants from each class. As shown in Figure
5, both classes of mutants were
stabilized relative to wild-type Swe1p, and their behavior was
comparable to that of wild-type Swe1p in a strain lacking Hsl7p.
|
In our strain background, hsl7
cells do not experience a
significant G2 delay during exponential growth, because the presence of
active Mih1p phosphatase counteracts the inhibitory effect of the
stabilized Swe1p. However, these cells are sensitized to the level of
Swe1p, and doubling the SWE1 gene dosage causes a G2 delay
associated with mild bud elongation reflecting the degree of Swe1p
activity (McMillan et al., 1999a
). When two copies of the
new SWE1 mutants were introduced into the sensitized
hsl7
strain, there was no discernible difference between
the mutant and wild-type Swe1p in the degree of bud elongation (and by
inference in their ability to promote G2 delay; Figure
6). This indicates that the mutants
impair a single pathway that targets Swe1p for Hsl7p-dependent
degradation.
|
Localization of Stabilized Swe1p Variants
Stabilization of Swe1p in strains expressing the mutants could
reflect a failure in nuclear export (trapping Swe1p in the nucleus), a
failure in neck targeting (so that cytoplasmic Swe1p can return to the
nucleus), or a failure to mark Swe1p for destruction once it reaches
the neck. To distinguish between these possibilities, we examined the
localization of the Swe1p variants encoded by representative mutants
from each class. Swe1p
1 was present in the
nucleus but was no longer detected at the neck (Figure
7A), suggesting a defect in either
nuclear export or neck targeting. In contrast,
Swe1pQ807R and Swe1pE797K
were still localized both to the nucleus and to the neck just like
wild-type Swe1p (Figure 7A), suggesting a defect at a later step in the
degradation pathway.
|
The failure of Swe1p
1 to localize to the neck
might stem from a specific defect in Hsl1p/7p-dependent neck targeting
or from an earlier block in Swe1p
1 nuclear
export. Because we do not know what pathways are used by Swe1p to enter
or leave the nucleus, we cannot directly assay the nuclear export
kinetics of Swe1p
1 compared with wild-type
Swe1p. However, we reasoned that if the only defect in
Swe1p
1 was an inability to be exported from
the nucleus, then it should be possible to restore
Swe1p
1 neck targeting by forcing it out of the
nucleus. To test whether that was the case, we fused two strong nuclear
export sequences (NES) derived from PKI to the C terminus of wild-type
or mutant Swe1p. As a control we constructed similar fusions with a
similar sequence containing inactivating mutations in the NES elements. The control inactive NES did not alter the localization of the Swe1p
(either wild-type or
1 mutant) to which it was fused (Figure 7B), as
expected. Swe1p (either wild-type or
1 mutant) fused to the active
NES no longer accumulated in the nucleus (Figure 7B), indicating that
the appended NES was able to promote effective nuclear export in both
cases. However, whereas the wild-type Swe1p-NES was still targeted to
the neck, Swe1p
1-NES failed to localize to the
neck (Figure 7B). This result suggests that the failure of
Swe1p
1 to accumulate at the neck was due to a
defect in neck targeting after nuclear export.
The construction of Swe1p-NES also allowed us to address whether Swe1p nuclear localization was important for Swe1p function. By monitoring the effectiveness of the morphogenesis checkpoint G2 delay in cells treated with the actin-depolymerizing drug latrunculin-B, we found that Swe1p-NES was much less effective at sustaining a checkpoint response than was wild-type Swe1p, indicating that optimal Swe1p function requires Swe1p nuclear localization.
Interaction of Stabilized Swe1p Variants with Hsl7p
Previous studies showed that Swe1p interacts with Hsl7p,
both in yeast lysates and in the absence of other yeast proteins (McMillan et al., 1999a
; Shulewitz et al., 1999
;
Cid et al., 2001
). To assess whether the stabilized variants
could similarly bind to Hsl7p, we made lysates from strains
overexpressing myc-tagged wild-type or mutant Swe1p and incubated those
lysates with recombinant GST-Hsl7p bound to glutathione beads.
Swe1p
1 displayed significantly reduced binding
to recombinant Hsl7p compared with wild-type Swe1p,
Swe1pI806T, or Swe1pQ807R
(Figure 8A). This result suggests that
the stabilization of Swe1p
1 (and by inference
that of the other N-terminal mutants) is due to reduced Hsl7p binding,
leading to a failure in neck targeting and hence degradation.
|
To test whether Swe1p
1 was indeed resistant to
the action of Hsl7p, we made use of the observation that overexpression
of Hsl7p partially overrides the morphogenesis checkpoint G2 delay in
cdc24 mutants that fail to form a bud (McMillan et
al., 1999a
). Whereas Hsl7p overexpression effectively reduced the
G2 delay in cdc24 cells containing wild-type Swe1p or
Swe1pQ807R, Hsl7p overexpression had no effect on
cells containing Swe1p
1 (Figure 8B). Together,
these data indicate that the N-terminal domain identified in the screen
is important for Swe1p interaction with Hsl7p and that this interaction
is critical for targeting Swe1p for degradation.
To delineate more precisely the requirements for Swe1p-Hsl7p interaction and neck targeting, we expressed a series of N- or C-terminally truncated Swe1p-myc derivatives in yeast, and assessed their ability to coimmunoprecipitate with Hsl7p-HA as well as their localization (Figure 8, C-E). An N-terminal Swe1p fragment, Swe1p1-510, was able to bind Hsl7p (Figure 8E), indicating that the bulk of the catalytic domain is dispensable for this interaction. In contrast, neither Swe1p1-310 nor Swe1p311-819 was able to bind Hsl7p, consistent with the existence of an interaction domain in the vicinity of residue 310, very close to the degradation determinant (residues 320-332) identified in the screen. Despite its ability to bind to Hsl7p, Swe1p1-510 was not detected at the bud neck, suggesting that Hsl7p interaction is not sufficient to promote effective neck targeting of Swe1p.
Interaction of C-terminal Mutants with Other Swe1p Regulators
The C-terminal mutants identified in our screens do not appear to affect interaction of Swe1p with Hsl7p, they are still downregulated by Hsl7p overexpression, and they are still targeted to the neck. Given our data suggesting that Clb/Cdc28p functions after neck targeting in the Swe1p degradation pathway, we hypothesized that these mutants might be resistant to the action of Clb/Cdc28p. However, we found that Swe1pQ807R interacted as well as wild-type Swe1p with Clb2p (Figure 3D) and that Swe1pQ807R was phosphorylated at least as well as wild-type Swe1p by Clb2p/Cdc28p (Figure 3A). Moreover, partial digestion of Clb/Cdc28p-phosphorylated Swe1p by V8 protease revealed no differences in the pattern of phospho-peptides produced from Swe1pQ807R or from wild-type Swe1p (Figure 3B). Thus, there is no evidence to suggest that the stability of Swe1pQ807R arises from a resistance to phosphorylation by Clb/Cdc28p.
Another regulator that may act on Swe1p is the polo-related kinase
Cdc5p, as Swe1p was identified in a two-hybrid screen for proteins that
interact with Cdc5p, and overexpression of Cdc5p downregulated Swe1p
(Bartholomew et al., 2001
). We had identified Cdc5p
ourselves in a two-hybrid screen for proteins that interact with Swe1p
(unpublished results), but using these constructs we found no
difference in the interaction of wild-type Swe1p or
Swe1pQ807R with Cdc5p (Figure
9). Thus, there is no evidence to suggest that the stability of Swe1pQ807R arises from a
defect in interacting with any of the known regulators of Swe1p.
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The results presented above have clarified several aspects of the Swe1p degradation pathway in yeast and identified two critical degradation determinants on Swe1p. Implications of these findings for the various steps in the pathway are discussed below.
Nuclear Export of Swe1p
Before bud emergence, Swe1p is concentrated within the nucleus,
suggesting that neck targeting after bud emergence involves nuclear
export of Swe1p (Longtine et al., 2000
). Nuclear export of
large proteins (like Swe1p) is mediated by association with "exportins," most prominently Xpo1p/Crm1p (Gorlich and Kutay, 1999
). The Swe1p sequence does not contain an obvious leucine-rich NES
of the type that binds Crm1p, but we expected to isolate mutants in our
screen that impaired Swe1p-exportin interactions and stabilized Swe1p
by trapping it in the nucleus. However, the two domains identified by
our 39 mutants appear to define determinants for neck targeting (amino
acids 320-332) and subsequent events (amino acids 797-807), rather
than nuclear export. There are at least three possible reasons for this
surprising absence. First, it is possible that Swe1p harbors two or
more redundant NES elements, so that simultaneous inactivating
mutations would be required to block export. Second, it is possible
that Swe1p nuclear export is important for Swe1p function (as well as
for Swe1p degradation) or that the presumed Swe1p NES overlaps with an
important functional determinant of Swe1p. Because our screen demanded
that the stabilized Swe1p be fully functional, we would not have
identified mutations that impaired both nuclear export and function of
Swe1p. Third, it is possible that Swe1p nuclear export, as well as neck
targeting, is mediated through interaction with Hsl7p. We isolated
several mutations defective in Hsl7p interaction and neck targeting,
and it is conceivable that these mutations also blocked nuclear export.
Neck Targeting of Swe1p
Neck targeting of Swe1p was previously suggested to be important
for Swe1p degradation based on the finding that Hsl1p and Hsl7p
(themselves localized to the bud side of the neck) were required for
both neck targeting and degradation of Swe1p (McMillan et
al., 1999a
; Longtine et al., 2000
). Moreover, mutations
that impaired septin organization reduced or eliminated neck targeting and caused a Swe1p-dependent cell cycle delay, suggesting that neck
localization was important for Swe1p degradation (Longtine et
al., 2000
). We isolated 14 SWE1 alleles bearing
mutations in a small region of Swe1p (amino acids 320-332, N-terminal
to the catalytic domain). Deletion of this domain impaired Swe1p
interaction with Hsl7p, eliminated detectable neck targeting of Swe1p
(even if Swe1p was forced out of the nucleus with a strong ectopic
NES), and blocked Swe1p degradation. These results strongly support the
hypothesis that interaction of Swe1p with Hsl7p is important for Swe1p
neck targeting and degradation and identify a key region of Swe1p
required for that interaction.
Phosphorylation of Swe1p
Swe1p is phosphorylated at many sites in a cell-cycle-dependent
manner (Sia et al., 1998
; Sreenivasan and Kellogg, 1999
). Our data support the hypothesis that much of that phosphorylation is
carried out by Cdc28p, but several unresolved questions remain. Which
Cdc28p complexes are responsible for Swe1p phosphorylation in vivo?
Where in the cell does that phosphorylation occur? And what role does
that phosphorylation play (if any) in Swe1p degradation? We found that
Clb/Cdc28p activity was required for a postneck-targeting step in Swe1p
degradation, but it is not clear whether that reflects a direct
requirement to phosphorylate Swe1p at some specific site(s) or an
indirect requirement for Clb/Cdc28p to act on some other Swe1p regulator.
If there were a specific site on Swe1p whose phosphorylation was key to Swe1p degradation, we would expect mutants altering that site to have emerged from our screen. We identified 25 mutants that blocked degradation at a step after Swe1p neck targeting, and each of these altered one of only three residues, none of which are phosphorylatable. Thus, this apparently saturated screen did not identify a key phosphorylation site, perhaps suggesting that Swe1p phosphorylation is not relevant to Swe1p degradation. However, it may be that phosphoryation at any of several Swe1p residues suffices to target Swe1p for degradation, so that no individual site is important enough to stabilize Swe1p when it is mutated.
Ubiquitination of Swe1p
Incubation of Swe1p together with a ubiquitination cocktail and a
lysate from wild-type yeast cells yields polyubiquitinated Swe1p,
suggesting that Swe1p degradation occurs via the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway (Kaiser et al., 1998
). Swe1p was stabilized in
met30-6 mutants at restrictive temperature, and in vitro
ubiquitination was severely reduced when using lysates from either
met30 or cdc34 mutant cells, consistent with the
hypothesis that Swe1p ubiquitination was carried out by the ubiquitin
ligase SCFMet30 in conjunction with the
ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme Cdc34p (Kaiser et al., 1998
).
However, these data were also consistent with an indirect role for
Met30p in Swe1p degradation. Subsequent studies indicated that the only
essential function of Met30p was to downregulate the transcription
factor Met4p (Patton et al., 2000
), and we found that Swe1p
was no longer stabilized in met30 met4 double mutants, suggesting that the Swe1p stabilization observed in met30
mutants arose indirectly through some action of the deregulated Met4p in those cells. This led us to suspect that the true ubiquitin ligase
responsible might be a distinct SCF complex. There are 16 F-box
proteins encoded in the yeast genome (Patton et al., 1998
),
of which only three (Cdc4p, Met30p, and Ctf13p) are essential for
viability. Cdc4p is not required for Swe1p degradation (Kaiser et
al., 1998
), and Ctf13p is thought to function at the
kinetochore rather than as a SCF component. Examination of
strains bearing deletions of each of the other F-box-protein encoding
genes (part of the Yeast Knockout Collection) revealed that none
contained elevated levels of Cdc28p Y19 phosphorylation. It remains
possible that one of these strains did contain stabilized Swe1p, but
that pleiotropic effects of the mutation (e.g., reduced SWE1
transcription or increased Mih1p activity) precluded detection of a
corresponding increase in Cdc28p phosphorylation. However, the simplest
interpretation of the result is that Swe1p degradation is not dependent
on any single F-box protein.
Another ubiquitin ligase responsible for targeting
cell-cycle-regulatory proteins for degradation is the multiprotein
anaphase-promoting complex (APC). This is currently thought to come in
one of two varieties, carrying either the Cdc20p- or Cdh1p-targeting
subunits (Morgan, 1999
). Previous findings indicated that Swe1p is
rapidly degraded in cells arrested at G2/M by the antimicrotubule drug nocodazole (Sia et al., 1998
). Cells arrested in this manner
have an activated spindle assembly checkpoint (thought to inactivate Cdc20p) and elevated Clb/Cdc28p activity (thought to inactivate Cdh1p),
so it seems unlikely that Swe1p degradation could be mediated by either
Cdc20p- or Cdh1p-associated APC. Thus, there is currently no obvious
candidate to mediate Swe1p ubiquitination.
Conservation of Swe1p Regulatory Domains
The repeated and independent isolation of mutations affecting each
of two small regions of Swe1p in our screen strongly indicates that
these regions are critical for Swe1p degradation. To assess how widely
conserved these functions might be, we compared the sequence of the
regions in Swe1p homologues from various species. Ashbya
gossypii is a close relative of S. cerevisiae that
grows as a filamentous fungus rather than as a yeast. Both regions
identified in our screen were highly conserved in A. gossypii Swe1p, whereas flanking regions were less conserved
(Figure 10). Thus, it seems likely that
similar interactions are involved in regulating Swe1p in these
organisms despite their different modes of growth.
|
When the analysis was extended to the distantly related fungi
Aspergillus nidulans and S. pombe, the N-terminal
Hsl7p-binding region did not show significant homology (Figure 10A).
This is perhaps indicative that Hsl7p-interaction is not a widely
conserved strategy for regulation of Swe1p homologues. Consistent with
that hypothesis, the S. pombe Hsl7p homolog Skb1 was
reported to have quite distinct effects on cell cycle progression in
that organism (Gilbreth et al., 1998
). On the other hand, it
has also been reported that the human Hsl7p homolog, JBP1, can
complement the phenotype of both a S. cerevisiae hsl7
mutant (Lee et al., 2000
) and a S. pombe skb1
mutant (Bao et al., 2001
), suggesting that both functions
are highly conserved. Because our screen demanded that the
SWE1 mutants be fully functional as well as nondegradable, we would not have identified mutants that impaired Hsl7p interaction if
they simultaneously impaired Swe1p function. Thus, there may be more
highly conserved Hsl7p-interaction domains in Swe1p that were missed in
the screen.
In contrast to the N-terminal Swe1p degradation determinant, the C-terminal determinant fell within a 50-residue domain that is highly conserved among the fungal Swe1p homologues (Figure 10B). This domain was not detectably conserved in animal or plant Swe1p homologues, suggesting that its function may be specific to fungi. Interestingly, the three specific residues targeted by our screen were by no means the most highly conserved within the domain (Figure 10B), and it is curious that other residues within this domain were not identified in the saturating screen. One possible explanation for this observation is that mutation of the most conserved residues would have caused misfolding of the domain, possibly destabilizing or inactivating the protein. It may be that only mutations affecting the domain's function in Swe1p degradation without causing overall domain misfolding would have survived our screening procedure. If so, then these mutants may specifically target contact sites for Swe1p regulators acting downstream of neck targeting.
| |
CONCLUSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The studies presented here have identified two determinants of Swe1p that target it for degradation and have significantly revised our understanding of the Swe1p degradation pathway in S. cerevisiae. The importance of the Swe1p-Hsl7p interaction for both neck targeting and degradation of Swe1p was established, but the events that follow neck targeting remain mysterious, and the ubiquitin ligase previously thought to act on Swe1p was not required for Swe1p degradation. The identification of a previously unappreciated domain at the Swe1p C terminus required for its degradation provides an entry point for seeking the Swe1p-interacting factors that act after neck targeting to degrade Swe1p.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Fred Cross, David Morgan, Peter Kaiser, Steve Reed, Nick Edgington, and Bruce Futcher for providing strains and/or constructs; Fred Cross and Doug Kellogg for communicating results before publication; Marcus Darrabie, Robin Davis, and Denise Ribar for their able technical assistance; Chris Holley and John York for help with the protein sequence alignments; Sally Kornbluth for critical reading of the manuscript; and Fred Dietrich and Peter Phillippsen for access to the Ashbya SWE1 sequence. We also thank the members of the Lew and Pringle laboratories for stimulating interactions. This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grant GM53050 and a Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Scholar award to D.J.L.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: daniel.lew{at}duke.edu.
Article published online ahead of print. Mol. Biol. Cell 10.1091/mbc.E02-05-0283. Article and publication date are at www.molbiolcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1091/mbc.E02-05-0283.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
W. Jonkers and M. Rep Lessons from Fungal F-Box Proteins Eukaryot. Cell, May 1, 2009; 8(5): 677 - 695. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Crutchley, K. M. King, M. A. Keaton, L. Szkotnicki, D. A. Orlando, T. R. Zyla, E. S.G. Bardes, and D. J. Lew Molecular Dissection of the Checkpoint Kinase Hsl1p Mol. Biol. Cell, April 1, 2009; 20(7): 1926 - 1936. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Keaton, L. Szkotnicki, A. R. Marquitz, J. Harrison, T. R. Zyla, and D. J. Lew Nucleocytoplasmic Trafficking of G2/M Regulators in Yeast Mol. Biol. Cell, September 1, 2008; 19(9): 4006 - 4018. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. J.R. Loewen, B. P. Young, S. Tavassoli, and T. P. Levine Inheritance of cortical ER in yeast is required for normal septin organization J. Cell Biol., November 5, 2007; 179(3): 467 - 483. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X.-D. Gao, L. M. Sperber, S. A. Kane, Z. Tong, A. H. Y. Tong, C. Boone, and E. Bi Sequential and Distinct Roles of the Cadherin Domain-containing Protein Axl2p in Cell Polarization in Yeast Cell Cycle Mol. Biol. Cell, July 1, 2007; 18(7): 2542 - 2560. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Bachand Protein Arginine Methyltransferases: from Unicellular Eukaryotes to Humans Eukaryot. Cell, June 1, 2007; 6(6): 889 - 898. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. M. Rubenstein and M. C. Schmidt Mechanisms Regulating the Protein Kinases of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Eukaryot. Cell, April 1, 2007; 6(4): 571 - 583. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. M. Enserink, M. B. Smolka, H. Zhou, and R. D. Kolodner Checkpoint proteins control morphogenetic events during DNA replication stress in Saccharomyces cerevisiae J. Cell Biol., December 4, 2006; 175(5): 729 - 741. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Ruault and L. Pillus Chromatin-Modifiying Enzymes Are Essential When the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Morphogenesis Checkpoint Is Constitutively Activated Genetics, November 1, 2006; 174(3): 1135 - 1149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A.-K. Souid, C. Gao, L. Wang, E. Milgrom, and W.-C. W. Shen ELM1 Is Required for Multidrug Resistance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics, August 1, 2006; 173(4): 1919 - 1937. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Y. Su, K. Flick, and P. Kaiser The F-Box Protein Met30 Is Required for Multiple Steps in the Budding Yeast Cell Cycle Mol. Cell. Biol., May 15, 2005; 25(10): 3875 - 3885. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.-E. Park, C. J. Park, K. Sakchaisri, T. Karpova, S. Asano, J. McNally, Y. Sunwoo, S.-H. Leem, and K. S. Lee Novel Functional Dissection of the Localization-Specific Roles of Budding Yeast Polo Kinase Cdc5p Mol. Cell. Biol., November 15, 2004; 24(22): 9873 - 9886. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. L. Ang and J. W. Harper Interwoven Ubiquitination Oscillators and Control of Cell Cycle Transitions Sci. Signal., July 20, 2004; 2004(242): pe31 - pe31. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Watanabe, H. Arai, Y. Nishihara, M. Taniguchi, N. Watanabe, T. Hunter, and H. Osada M-phase kinases induce phospho-dependent ubiquitination of somatic Wee1 by SCF{beta}-TrCP PNAS, March 30, 2004; 101(13): 4419 - 4424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Sakchaisri, S. Asano, L.-R. Yu, M. J. Shulewitz, C. J. Park, J.-E. Park, Y.-W. Cho, T. D. Veenstra, J. Thorner, and K. S. Lee Coupling morphogenesis to mitotic entry PNAS, March 23, 2004; 101(12): 4124 - 4129. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Ciliberto, B. Novak, and J. J. Tyson Mathematical model of the morphogenesis checkpoint in budding yeast J. Cell Biol., December 22, 2003; 163(6): 1243 - 1254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. R. Kellogg Wee1-dependent mechanisms required for coordination of cell growth and cell division J. Cell Sci., December 15, 2003; 116(24): 4883 - 4890. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. L. Theesfeld, T. R. Zyla, E. G.S. Bardes, and D. J. Lew A Monitor for Bud Emergence in the Yeast Morphogenesis Checkpoint Mol. Biol. Cell, August 1, 2003; 14(8): 3280 - 3291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||