|
|
|
|
Vol. 14, Issue 5, 1852-1867, May 2003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||



* Department of Molecular Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
14853-6401;
Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University of Pennsylvania
School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-6058
Submitted November 4, 2002;
Revised January 1, 2003;
Accepted January 13, 2003
Monitoring Editor: Suzanne Pfeffer
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Recently, a consensus seems to be emerging that one commonality of Rab
protein function is to participate in the tethering of a vesicle or membrane
transport carrier (Pfeffer,
1999
). Tethering refers to the process by which the membrane bound
transport carriers dock onto the acceptor compartment. Tethering is the
prelude to, and initiator of the cascade of events that terminate in a soluble
N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein
receptor-mediated membrane fusion event. Even tethering may be controlled by
Rab proteins through diverse mechanisms; for example, the tethering of
constitutive post-Golgi vesicles at the plasma membrane is a transient event
and very different from the rapid, signal-mediated fusion of synaptic
post-Golgi vesicles that may exist in the tethered state for a prolonged time
period (Wang et al.,
1997
). These examples, in turn, differ in their requirements from
the fusion of post-Golgi vesicles with the plasma membrane of budding yeast,
where tethering events must be spatially regulated and are coordinated with
cell cycle progression.
Ras GTPases function as regulatory switches where the GDP-bound is the
ground or "off" state and GTP-bound is the activated state
(Vetter and Wittinghofer,
2001
). It is still unclear whether Rab proteins function as binary
switches in a similar manner to Ras with a single GTP turnover event for each
round of transport. An alternative modality is suggested by analogy to the Rho
family GTPase CDC42 where it is the rate of cycling, rather than the lifetime
of the activated state, that is important for initiation of downstream events
(Rybin et al., 1996
;
Lin et al.,
1997
).
One characteristic that Rab proteins do share with other members of the Ras
superfamily is that these proteins are posttranslationally modified by the
covalent attachment of isoprenoids on cysteine residues at the C terminus
(Seabra, 1998
). For the Ras,
Rho, and Rab families, there are three major types of isoprenylation reactions
mediated by three prenyl transferases that are conserved from yeast to human
(for review, see Liang et al.,
2002
). The cysteine-containing motifs at the C terminus dictate
the type of isoprenylation received by the small GTPase. A CAAX box where C is
cysteine, A is aliphatic residue, and X is A, C, E, M, S, or V such as in
H-Ras, K-Ras, and yeast Ras1p and Ras2p, is modified by farnesylation (C15
isoprenoid) by farensyl transferase (FTase). When X is leucine or a
hydrophobic residue, typically found in Rho proteins such as CDC42, this is as
substrate for geranylgeranyl transferase I (GGTase I), which attaches a C20
isoprenoid moiety. Rab proteins fall into a special category. The majority of
them contain two cysteine residues at the C terminus in one of the following
sequences: CXC, CC, CCX, CCXX, or CCXXX. The cysteine residues are subject to
isoprenylation with two geranylgeranyl moieties catalyzed by geranylgeranyl
transferase II (GGTase II). All the prenyltansferase enzymes consist of two
subunits, however, in the case of GGTaseII, there is a third subunit, Rab
escort protein (REP), which does not participate in the catalytic reaction but
serves as a chaperone to introduce the prenyltransferase to its Rab protein
substrate (Desnoyoyers et al.,
1996
).
Ras, Rho, and Rab superfamily members can be found in both
membrane-associated and cytosolic pools. It is clear that prenylation is a
necessary modification for the protein to be present in the membrane-bound
pool, Ras superfamily members with mutations in their C-terminal cysteines
that cannot be prenylated are soluble and nonfunctional
(Walworth et al.,
1989
). Such experiments have propagated the view that the sole
function of prenylation is to confer hydrophobic character onto a cytosolic
protein, giving the recipient protein the physical ability to make a stable
attachment with a lipid bilayer. In this study, we have focused on the
question of what role, if any, is played by the particular type of lipid
modification. Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae as a model system, we
have examined the effect of different lipid modifications on Rab protein
localization and function.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Plasmid Constructs
Plasmid constructs and oligonucleotides are listed in Tables
2 and
3. Yeast Rab genes were cloned
under the control of an endogenous promoter and terminator with yeast-enhanced
GFP (GenBank accession no. U73901
[GenBank]
) fused in frame at the N terminus by
polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and cloned into the CEN LEU2 vector
pRS315 or pRS316 to generate plasmids containing GFP-tagged genes. Plasmids
with wild-type Rab genes were used as templates to generate the GFP-tagged
C-terminal prenylation variants. The prenylation mutants with a terminal CTIM
sequence were cloned into pRS315 or pRS316 by overlap PCR by placing the C
terminus of RHO3 containing the sequence CTIM and terminator in place
of the two terminal cysteines by using the forward primer MC25 and reverse
primers with overlap sequence to MC25 for SEC4 (MC27), YPT7
(MC26), VPS21 (MC31), YPT1 (MC32), and YPT6 (MC30).
The Rab prenylation variants with a terminal CIIL sequence were cloned into
pRS315 or pRS316 by overlap PCR by using specific forward and reverse primers
with nucleotide sequence coding for CIIL and the endogenous terminators of
each Rab. Primers MC54 and MC55 were used for cloning SEC4, MC58, and
MC59 for YPT7, MC60 and MC61 for YPT6, and MC64 and MC65 for
YPT1. For SEC4C214S,
YPT1C205S, SEC4
CC,
and YPT1
CC, a similar approach was used
with primers MC66, MC67, MC68, MC69, MC70, MC71, MC72, and MC73.
VPS21CIIL was cloned with primer MC75, which anneals to
the C terminus of VPS21 and overlaps with MC74, a primer-encoding
CIIL sequence and the terminator of SEC4. Untagged wild-type
SEC4 and YPT1 were constructed with genomic PCR by using
primers YFSEC4, YRSEC4, YFYPT1, and YRYPT1 and cloned into pRS315 or pRS316.
Untagged prenylation variants of SEC4 and YPT1 were cloned
into pRS315 and pRS316 by overlap PCR by using YFSEC4 and YFYPT1 and primers
as described above for the GFP-tagged variants. The primers RNC200 and RNC201
were used with genomic DNA template to clone full-length GDP-dissociation
inhibitor 1 (GDI1) into the vectors YEP24 and YCP50. SEC4,
SEC4CTIM, SEC4CIIL,
SEC4C214S, and
SEC4
CC were cloned into pAS21 to
create two-hybrid "bait" plasmids. SEC4CTIM
and SEC4C214S were cloned using primers NS1 with YRRHO3,
and NS2 with RNC264, respectively, and subcloned in-frame into pAS2-1 vector.
SEC4CIIL was cloned by genomic PCR with primers MC56 and MC57 and
subcloned into pAS21. Other Y2H constructs used have been described
previously (Calero et al.,
2002
). Sec7p was tagged with Discosoma red fluorescent
protein (DsRed)T4 (Bevis and Glick,
2002
) at the C terminus with the linker sequence GGPGG and
subcloned into pRS316 with the endogenous promoter and 572 bp from the
ADH1 3' region to create pRC2240. A human open reading frame
(ORF) encoding a protein with homology to Yip1p was reconstructed by alignment
of accession numbers AA171435
[GenBank]
, AA373289
[GenBank]
, H83008
[GenBank]
, N73033
[GenBank]
, R88629
[GenBank]
, T71419
[GenBank]
, and
W17013
[GenBank]
. The ORF was cloned by coupled reverse transcription-PCR by using the
reverse transcription primer 5'-GGCCACGCGTCGACTAGTAC(T)17 and
gene-specific PCR primers 5'-CTGGATCCTCGCAATGTCAGGCTTTGAAAACTTAAACACGG
and 5'-GATGCGCGTCTCGAGTCAAAAGACGGAAATCAGGGCAAAGAC. Then 250 ng of human
skeletal muscle poly(A)+ RNA (BD Biosciences Clontech, Palo Alto,
CA) was reverse transcribed with Superscript II according to the
manufacturer's protocol. Purified cDNA was used as a template in PCR reactions
to amplify human YIP1. The sequence of the human ORF is identical to the
previously reported YIP1A (Tang et
al., 2001
). Oligonucleotides used in this study were from by
Integrated DNA Technologies and Sigma Genosys (The Woodlands, TX). DNA
sequencing was performed by the Cornell Biotechnology Facility by using dye
terminator chemistry on an ABI 373 sequencer (Applied Biosystems, Foster City,
CA).
|
|
Creation of yip1-4 Thermosensitive Allele
YIP1 gene deletion was carried out using the KANR
module (Wach et al.,
1994
) as a selectable marker and the oligonucleotides S1YIP1 and
S2YIP1 to precisely eliminate the YIP1 ORF in the diploid yeast
strain BY24. The mutant allele of YIP1 was generated by a standard
plasmid shuffling procedure (Sikorski
et al., 1991
). Briefly, RCY1610 was transformed with
plasmid pRS315 containing the mutant yip1-4 gene created with primers
KAH7 and KAH8 and genomic DNA template. Transformants were selected on
synthetic media lacking leucine followed by colony purification on
fluoroorotic acid (5-FOA)-containing media. 5-FOAresistant colonies
were tested for temperature-sensitive growth on rich media.
Triton X-114 Partition Experiments
Triton X-114 (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN) was purified by
precondensation as described previously
(Bordier, 1981
). Then 5 OD
units of yeast strains were harvested and washed in 1 ml of TAZ buffer.
Postnuclear supernatants were generated by two sequential centrifugation steps
for 5 min at 500 x g. Then 500 µl of phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS) containing 2% Triton X-114 with protease inhibitors (1 mM EDTA, 1
mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1 mM benzamidine, and 10 µg pepstatin A)
was added to the post-nuclear supernatants. The samples were incubated for 20
min at 4°C to solubilize membrane proteins. To separate the
detergent-enriched and the -soluble phases, samples were incubated for 3 min
at 30°C followed by low-speed centrifugation at room temperature. This
cycle was repeated two times with the detergent-enriched and -soluble phases
individually. The detergent phase was washed twice with PBS containing 0.05%
Triton X-114 and the soluble phase with 2% Triton X-114. Samples were then
incubated with an equal volume of 10% trichloroacetic acid on ice for 30 min
followed by a centrifugation at 4°C for 15 min. The protein pellets were
washed twice with 300 µl of cold acetone and resuspended in 15 µl of SDS
sample buffer. The samples were then analyzed by SDS-PAGE and Western blot.
Affinity-purified
-GFP polyclonal antibody (gift from Pam Silver,
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA; Seedorf
et al., 1999
) and alkaline phosphatase-conjugated
anti-rabbit secondary antibody (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) were used to detect the
GFP-tagged Rab protein. Snc1/2p, an integral membrane protein, was detected
with anti-Snc1/2p antisera (gift from P. Brennwald, Cell and Developmental
Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC).
Microscopy
For direct fluorescence microscopy, yeast strains were grown to mid-log
phase in selection media. For visualization of the nuclei, the samples were
incubated with 5 µg/ml Hoechst 33258 (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR) for 5
min. For immunofluorescence microscopy, cells were grown to early log phase in
YPD or selection media. A 2x fixative (2x PBS, 4% glucose, 40 mM
EGTA, and 7.4% formaldehyde) was added to an equal volume of medium containing
3 OD units of cells and incubated for 20 min at room temperature. Cells were
then collected by centrifugation, resuspended in 5 ml of 1x fixative,
and incubated for a further 1 h. The cells were washed twice in 2 ml of
spheroplasting buffer (100 mM KPi pH 7.5 and 1.2 M sorbitol) and then
incubated in spheroplasting buffer containing 0.2% 2-mercaptoethanol and 0.08
mg/ml zymolyase for 30 min at 37°C with gentle mixing. Then 20 µl of
the cell suspension was placed on individual wells of a polylysine-coated
printed microscope slides (Carlson Scientific, Peotone, IL) for 10 min. The
cells were then washed three times with PBS/bovine serum albumin (BSA) (1
mg/ml BSA) and permeabilized for 5 min with 0.1% SDS. After washing five times
in PBS/BSA, cells were blocked for 30 min in PBS/BSA. Monoclonal 1.2.3
antibody was used to detect Sec4p (gift from P. Brennwald). Alexa 488-labeled
anti-mouse secondary antibody (Molecular Probes) was used at a dilution of
1:250. Cells were examined with an Eclipse E600 (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) equipped
with a 60x objective and 1.5x optovar. A Spot-RT monochrome
charge-coupled device camera (Diagnostic Instruments, Stirling Heights, MI)
with software version 3.5 was used for image capture. All images shown are
representative images from small budded cells in logarithmic phase growth.
Yeast Two-Hybrid (Y2H) Experiments
ORF sequences were subcloned into pAS1-CYH2 or pAS21 for
"bait" and pACTII for "fish" constructs and
transformed into the yeast strain Y190, which contains the reporter genes lacZ
and HIS3 downstream of the binding sequences for Gal4
(Bai and Elledge, 1996
). Double
transformants were plated on selective media and incubated for 23 d at
30°C before processing for
-galactosidase activity as described
previously (Calero et al.,
2002
).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
CC and
sec4
CC, rendering the proteins unable to
be prenylated.
We began our studies by investigating whether the prenylation variants
could complement the thermosensitive alleles sec4-8 and
ypt1-3. The proteins encoded by these alleles are temperature
sensitive, resulting in a complete loss of function at 37 and 40°C,
respectively. Each prenylation mutant on CEN vectors was transformed
into the sec4-8 temperature-sensitive strain or the ypt1-3
temperature sensitive strain. Transformants were streaked at both permissive
and restrictive-temperatures and growth was assessed 2 to 3 d later.
YPT1 and ypt1CIIL but not
ypt1CTIM, ypt1C205S, or
ypt1
CC could complement ypt1-3
at restrictive temperature (Figure
1A). Similarly, in the case of sec4-8 cells, only
SEC4, sec4CIIL, and GFP-SEC4 could rescue the
temperature growth defect but not sec4CTIM,
sec4C214S, and
sec4
CC
(Figure 1B).
|
These experiments suggest that Rab proteins have a degree of dependence on
their prenylation status for full function. However, it remained possible that
the C-terminal variants that were unable to suppress the temperature-sensitive
phenotype could in fact function at lower temperatures, a possibility that
would not be revealed by suppression analysis. To address this issue, we
investigated whether any of the prenylation variants were capable of function
as the only copy of the Rab gene in the cell. For these experiments, we
transformed the LEU2 CEN plasmids containing the wild-type and
prenylation mutants of YPT1 and SEC4 into a
SEC4
::HIS3 strain or a
YPT1
::HIS3 strain containing a CEN URA3
plasmid with either SEC4 or YPT1 as the sole source of
wild-type SEC4 or YPT1. Transformants were streaked on
5-FOAcontaining media to select for loss of the URA3 plasmid containing
wild-type SEC4 or YPT1. In this way, we could assess whether
the mutants were able to supply the essential function of SEC4 and
YPT1 genes. In Figure
2, we show the results of these experiments. Only the wild-type
Rab ORF (YPT1 or SEC4) could function as the sole source of
these essential genes. None of the singly prenylated or unprenylated mutants
can act as the sole source of the Rab protein, indicating that
di-geranylgeranylation of SEC4 and YPT1 is critical for
function. The results we obtain for YPT1 differ from those reported
by Gallwitz and colleagues who find that mono-prenylated Ypt1p is fully
functional as the sole copy (Molenaar
et al., 1988
). It is possible that strain differences and
protein expression levels differ between these two sets of experiments and can
account for the difference in results.
|
Singly Prenylated Rab Proteins Do Not Localize to the Correct
Subcellular Membrane
To examine the lack of function of the prenylation variants, we wished to
determine the effect of these prenylation variants on localization. For this
purpose, we created centromeric plasmids containing the GFP-tagged Rab
proteins Sec4p, Ypt1p, Ypt6p, Vps21p, and Ypt7p with different C-terminal
variants that would result in different types of prenylation. This group
embodies a representative set of yeast Rab proteins: Ypt1p, Ypt6p, and Sec4p
are involved at different stages of exocytosis; Vps21p is involved in
endocytosis; and Ypt7p is involved in vacuolar transport (for review, see
Lazar et al., 1997
).
In addition, all these Rab proteins have been well studied and their
characteristic localization has been firmly established.
Centromeric vectors containing GFP-YPT1,
GFP-ypt1CTIM, GFP-ypt1CIIL,
GFP-SEC4, GFP-sec4CTIM,
GFP-sec4CIIL, GFP-YPT6,
GFP-ypt6CTIM, GFP-ypt6CIIL,
GFP-YPT7, GFP-ypt7CTIM,
GFP-ypt7CIIL, GFP-VPS21,
GFP-vps21CTIM, and GFP-vps21CIIL were
transformed into yeast, and their localization was examined by fluorescence
microscopy (Figure 3). The
wild-type GFP-Rab constructs localized to patterns identical to the wild-type
untagged protein according to published results. For SEC4, an
essential gene, GFP-SEC4 could function as the sole cellular source
of SEC4 (as shown in Figure
2), demonstrating that physiological function of the Rab is
unimpaired by the N-terminal GFP tag. GFP-YPT1 can also function as
the sole cellular source of YPT1 (our unpublished data). GFP-Sec4p is
localized to the bud tip as a bright fluorescent spot
(Brennwald and Novick, 1993
,
#22; Figure 3D); GFP-Ypt1p
(Figure 3A) and GFP-Ypt6p
(Figure 3G) are localized to
punctate structures representing yeast Golgi cisternae
(Beranger et al.,
1994
); GFP-Ypt7p (Figure
3J) is localized to the vacuole
(Haas et al., 1995
;
Figure 1D); and GFP-Vps21p
(Figure 3M) is localized to
distinct punctate endosomal structures
(Singer-Kruger et al.,
1995
; Figure
1E).
|
In each case examined, the farnesylated (CTIM) or the mono-geranylgeranylated (CIIL) Rab showed marked mislocalization (Figure 3, B and C, E and F, H and I, K and L, and N and O). In some cases such as ypt1CIIL (B), ypt1CTIM (C), and sec4CIIL (E), the fluorescence pattern reflected reticular structures suggestive of endoplasmic reticulum. In the case of sec4CTIM (F), ypt6CTIM (F), ypt6CIIL (H), ypt7CTIM (L), ypt7CIIL (K), vps21CTIM (O), and vps21CIIL (N), the fluorescence seemed to be a rather nonspecific cytoplasmic signal. For each experiment, the Hoechst and differential interference images are included as reference points to indicate the cell cycle stage of the cells.
We continued our analysis of the localization of singly prenylated Rab
proteins by studying the localization of GFP-sec4C214S and
GFP-ypt1C205S (Figure
3, PS). In principle, these mutants should result in
equivalent mono-geranylgeranylation status to sec4CIIL or
ypt1CIIL, the exclusive substrate of GGTaseII in the
former case and of either GGTaseI or GGTaseII in the latter case. The
suppression analysis (Figure
1), however, suggested that CIIL box-containing mutants, but not
the single point mutants, were able to complement the temperature-sensitive
alleles of sec4-8 or ypt1-3, suggesting that there are
differences between these mutants. Because REP is the chaperone that presents
the Rab protein to GGTaseII, it is thought that REP is responsible for
mediating the very first membrane-targeting event in the existence of the Rab
protein. If this is the case, and if the initial REP-mediated targeting is
critical, perhaps the CAAX box variants we constructed are unable to localize
correctly because these sequences are in vivo substrates for FTase or GGTaseI,
but not REP/GGTaseII. As a control, we included the localization of
GFP-sec4
CC and
GFP-ypt1
CC, mutants that lack
prenylation and are therefore soluble and cytoplasmic. The localization of
GFP-sec4C214S (Figure
3P) and ypt1C205S
(Figure 3R) reflected a
nonspecific cytoplasmic signal far from the typical localization of the
wild-type proteins. It may be that the singly prenylated Rab is unable to
detach from REP and be delivered onto membranes and we did observe slower
growth rates of cells expressing sec4C214S and
ypt1C205S, which would agree with the suggestion that such
mutants are acting as dominant blockers of REP-mediated prenylation in vivo.
Interestingly, the localization of the partly functional
sec4CIIL and ypt1CIIL is reticular and
not cytoplasmic (Figure 3, B and
E), which could explain the partial functionality, if sufficient
Rab protein reached the correct location via indirect means.
For Ypt1p, Sec4p, Ypt6p, Vps21p, and Ypt7p, the GFP-tagged protein gave a
subcellular localization pattern that is identical to previously published
reports from immunofluorescence experiments with untagged proteins. However,
it remained formally possible that the GFP tag may have affected the
prenylation mutants in a manner different to wild type. We therefore carried
out immunofluorescence studies to determine the localization of untagged
wild-type SEC4 in comparison with prenylation variants. Because the
prenylation variants cannot support growth at single sole copy, we made use of
a yeast strain, AG6 with a functional SEC4 gene that is antigenically
silent to the anti-Sec4p monoclonal antibody (mAb) 1.2.3
(Brennwald and Novick, 1993
).
In this strain, SEC4 is deleted and a Sec4p chimera with Loop7 and
the hypervariable C-terminal domain derived from Ypt1p covers Sec4p function.
Because this construct has wild-type SEC4 function but is not
recognized by the mAb 1.2.3, it could be used to examine the localization of
the SEC4 variants by immunofluorescence. The only SEC4 constructs recognized
by the antibody in this strain background should be the prenyl variants and
controls that are expressed from episomal plasmids. The results of this
experiment are shown in Figure
4. The plasmid-dependent nature of the immunofluorescence signal
is demonstrated in Figure 4a, where the vector only control gave only background immunofluorescence. Neither
sec4CIILp or sec4CTIMp localized in a
manner similar to wild-type Sec4p (Figure
4b) where the signal is tightly restricted to the bud tip of small
budded cells. The localization of the SEC4 mutants by indirect
immunofluorescence was very similar to that of the GFP-SEC4 mutants
by direct fluorescence, indicating that the GFP-tag is not responsible for
alterations in the localization of the prenyl variants of Sec4p shown in
Figure 3. Together, these
experiments confirm that double prenylation is absolutely required for correct
targeting of Rab GTPases.
|
Rab C-Terminal Variants Are Modified by Prenylation
In our examination of the localization of singly prenylated Rab proteins by
fluorescence microscopy, we found the mutant Rab proteins to be present both
on particulate, endomembrane structures and also observed diffuse cytoplasmic
signals. One reason for the observed cytoplasmic localization could be that
the singly prenylated Rabs are complexed to chaperone-like proteins such as
Gdi1p or Mrs6p, which enable the prenylated proteins to reside in the cytosol.
Alternatively, our mutants could be unmodified by prenylation and therefore
resident in the cytosol. To rule out the latter possibility, we determined
whether our mutant constructs were being modified by prenylation by carrying
out Triton X-114 partition experiments. Triton X-114 is a nonionic detergent
with a cloud point at the physiological temperature of 30°C
(Pryde, 1986
). By incubating
postnuclear supernatants with this detergent at 30°C followed by a
low-speed centrifugation, it is possible to separate the detergent phase that
contains membrane proteins and lipid modified proteins from the aqueous phase
that contains cytosolic proteins. Triton X-114 phase partitioning was
performed on lysates from yeast strains expressing GFP-Ypt1p,
GFP-Ypt1CTIM, GFP-Ypt1CIIL, GFP-Ypt1C205S,
GFP-Ypt1
CC, GFP-Sec4p, GFP-Sec4pCTIM,
Sec4pCIIL, GFP-Sec4pC214S, and
GFP-Sec4
CC. As a positive control, we probed the
blots for the presence of an integral membrane protein, Snc2/1p. The results
of this experiment are shown in Figure
5. All mutants except for the
GFP-Ypt1p
CC and
GFP-Sec4p
CC, partitioned in the detergent phase,
which indicates that they are modified by prenylation. The expression levels
of the constructs are all roughly equivalent (our unpublished data),
indicating that the degree of partitioning into the detergent phase shown in
Figure 5 probably reflects the
fraction of lipid modified Rab protein. In the case of Sec4CTIMp
and Sec4C214Sp, the fraction of lipid modified is less than for
wild-type Sec4p, suggesting perhaps inefficient prenylation. However, even
when the prenyl variants of Ypt1p and also Sec4CTIMp and
Sec4C214Sp are overexpressed from a multi-copy plasmids, they
cannot rescue function (our unpublished data), suggesting that it is not the
overall amount of prenylated protein, but the type of modification that is the
important factor. The result of this experiment gave us confidence that the
prenyl Rab variants we created are indeed modified in the expected manner as
predicted from the enzymology and in vivo action of the prenyltransferase
enzymes.
|
Yip1p Is Sensitive to Rab Protein Prenylation Status
Our results indicated that di-geranylgeranyl groups are required for
correct targeting and function of Rab proteins. Mono-geranylgeranylation of
Rab proteins, although conferring hydrophobic character sufficient to mediate
membrane association, cannot substitute for the double geranylgeranylation.
One possibility is that the functionality is related to the hydrophobicity of
the lipid modification, with a gradient from farnesylation (C15) to double
geranylgeranylation (two C20 moeities). An alternative explanation might be
the existence of Rab-interacting proteins whose interaction is dependent on
specific C-terminal prenylation and who play a role in mediating specific
localization of Rab proteins. Currently, there are only seven known factors,
Rab-GDI, Yip4p, Yip5p, Yif1p, Yip3p/Pra1p, the Rab3-specific GAP, and
Rab3-GEF, that require prenylation for productive Rab protein interactions.
Rab-GDI is a soluble protein whose recognition site consists of both the
GDP-bound Rab and its prenylation moiety (for review, see
Wu et al., 1996
). It
is conserved throughout evolution and its in vivo role is to remove Rab
protein from the membrane and recycle the protein through the cytosol before
delivering the protein back onto donor membranes. Yif1p, Yip4p, and Yip5p are
members of an evolutionarily conserved YIP1-like membrane protein family
(Matern et al., 2000
;
Calero et al., 2002
).
YIP1-related proteins seem to play roles in membrane transport, and it has
been suggested that all of these family members interact with Rab proteins in
a prenylation-dependent manner (Calero
et al., 2002
). PRA1 and its yeast homolog Yip3p/Pra1p are
membrane proteins originally identified as Rab-interacting factors
(Martincic et al.,
1997
; Calero et al.,
2002
), although it has since been demonstrated for Pra1p/Yip3p
that the interaction solely relies on a prenyl moiety and simple addition of a
CAAX box onto a soluble protein such as GFP is sufficient for interaction
(Figueroa et al.,
2001
). The Rab3-specific GEP and -GEF are specific to mammalian
cells where they regulate the activation and deactivation of the neuronal
Rab3A (Fukui et al.,
1997
; Wada et al.,
1997
).
We examined the prenylation status of Rab interactions with Yip1p as a
representative member of the YIP1 family. We started by testing the
interactions of Yip1p and various Rab proteins and compared these interactions
with those of Rab-GDI with Rab proteins. Interactions were monitored by Y2H
assay. Pairs of constructs were transformed into the Y190 reporter strain and
leu+trp+ transformants were analyzed by
-galactosidase assays. The results of these experiments are shown in
Figure 6A where Rab proteins
expressed as bait constructs are tested for interactions with Rab-GDI and YIP1
"prey" constructs. The interactions between Yip1p and Rab proteins
were very similar to the interactions of Rab-GDI and Rab proteins
(Figure 6A). Namely, all of the
Rab proteins tested (Sec4p, Vps21p, Ypt1p, Ypt6p, Ypt7p, Ypt52p, Vps21p, and
Ypt53p) are capable of interaction with Rab-GDI and Yip1p. However,
Sec4
CCp does not interact with either Yip1p or
Rab-GDI, confirming that the interactions are dependent upon C-terminal
prenylation in this system. The requirement for geranylgeranylation of Rab
proteins for productive interaction with Rab-GDI has been established
previously (for review, see Pfeffer et
al., 1995
). No constructs showed autoactivation when
partnered with vector only, no insert control plasmids.
|
|
Having established that prenylation is necessary for both Yip1p
interactions with Sec4p, we next tested whether the interactions would be
conserved with our monoprenylated variants Sec4CTIMp and
Sec4CIILp. Neither Yip1p nor Rab-GDI will interact with the
farnesylated Sec4CTIMp, but, although Rab-GDI was able to interact
with the mono-prenylated Rab protein Sec4CIILp, Yip1p was not
(Figure 6C). These results are
in agreement with previous studies showing Rab-GDI can interact with
mono-geranylgeranylated Rab proteins
(Soldati et al.,
1993
) and indicate that Yip1p has a specific recognition
determinant for doubly prenylated Rab GTPases. In this experiment, we also
included the Sec4p point mutations S29V and Q79L. These point mutations
influence the conformation of Sec4p, the former toward the GDP-bound and the
latter toward the GTP-bound due to its effect on the GTP hydrolysis rate. In
the Y2H system, the Sec4S29Vp mutant, unlike the wild-type protein,
is capable of productive interactions with its exchange factor, and the
Sec4Q79Lp mutant interacts with its effector protein in a manner
greatly stimulated over wild-type Sec4p, demonstrating that these point
mutants retain their effects in this assay. These mutants are nontoxic when
expressed with intact di-cysteine motifs, unlike the dominant negative point
mutations, and we used them to examine whether the interactions between Yip1p
and Sec4p are influenced by the nucleotide-binding confirmation. Both
Sec4S29Vp and Sec4Q79Lp interacted with Yip1p in a
manner identical to wild-type Sec4p (Figure
6C), suggesting no strong influence of nucleotide-dependent
confirmation on Yip1p interaction with Sec4p. We also found a similar result
for the interaction of Sec4p with Rab-GDI, in the Y2H assay, Rab-GDI cannot
discriminate between Sec4p, Sec4S29Vp, and
Sec4Q79Lp.
Our experiments (Figures 1,
2,
3) indicated that double
prenylation is a requirement for proper functioning and localization of Rab
GTPases; however, it is of note that there are several Rab proteins that
contain CAAX boxes instead of the double cysteine motif and are therefore
mono-prenylated (Wilson et al.,
1998
). Such Rab proteins are not present in yeast but are found in
mammalian cells. We therefore investigated whether the human homolog of YIP1,
YIP1A, will interact with these naturally monoprenylated Rab proteins. In
Figure 6D, we demonstrate that
human YIP1A does interact with human Rab5a and canine Rab1a but not with the
CAAX box-containing Rab proteins Rab8 and Rab13. Human YIP1A will also
interact with a number of yeast Rab proteins: Sec4p, Ypt1p, Vps21p, and Ypt6p.
Neither human YIP1A, or yeast YIP1, will interact with the mono-prenylated
SEC4 variants. Notably, although Rab8 and Rab13 were incapable of human YIP1A
or yeast Yip1p interaction, they were fully able to interact with Rab-GDI.
The two-hybrid experiments in Figure
6D revealed that human YIP1A and yeast Yip1p show striking
cross-species conservation of interactions, with human YIP1A capable of
interactions with yeast Rab proteins, and yeast Yip1p with mammalian Rab
proteins. These results prompted us to test whether this conservation of
protein interactions was functionally significant. We asked whether human
YIP1A could functionally replace its yeast homolog and act as the only
cellular source of the otherwise essential YIP1 gene. For this
experiment, we created a LEU2 CEN plasmid containing the human YIP1A
ORF with the endogenous YIP1 promoter and 572 base pairs from the
ADH1 3' region to provide a generic yeast termination signal
element. The HsYIP1A plasmid (pRC2170) was transformed into a
YIP1
strain containing a URA3 CEN plasmid with Yip1p
as the sole source of Yip1p. Transformants were streaked to 5-FOA plates to
select for loss of the URA3 plasmid to assess whether human YIP1A
could act as the only copy of Yip1 in the cell. In
Figure 6E, we show that both
yeast containing wild-type YIP1 and human YIP1A can survive
equivalently on the 5-FOAcontaining media, whereas a control plasmid
with no insert cannot. The fact that human YIP1A can function similarly to
yeast YIP1, an essential gene in S. cerevisiae underscores
the conservation of Rab protein interactions presented in
Figure 6D.
Our data indicate that Yip1p is factor that interacts with Rab proteins in
a di-geranylgeranylationdependent manner and that
di-geranylgeranylation is critical for Rab protein function and localization.
The exact role of Yip1p is not known and to get an insight into Yip1p function
in vivo, we created a mutant allele of YIP1, yip1-4. yip1-4 contains
a single point mutation E70K in the cytoplasmic domain. Yip1-4 cells
are thermosensitive and do not grow on YPD at 34 or 37°C
(Figure 7A). Using the
temperature-sensitive allele yip1-4, we examined the effect of
conditional loss of Yip1p function on the localization of Ypt1p in vivo.
GFP-Ypt1p was transformed into yip1-4 and isogenic wild-type control
cells. Cells were grown to log phase at 25°C before shifting them to the
restrictive temperature of 37°C. Samples were taken after shift at times
of 0, 10, 20, 30, and 45 min for visualization of GFP-Ypt1p location by
fluorescence microscopy. The localization of GFP-Ypt1p in cells bearing the
yip1-4 allele becomes diffuse and cytoplasmic after only 10 min shift
to restrictive temperature (Figure
7B). By 30 min at restrictive temperature, the punctate structures
characteristic of Golgi cisternae are very rare and by 45 min, GFP-Ypt1p in
these cells is exclusively diffuse in appearance. Electron microscopy of the
yip1-4 cells at restrictive temperature shows a predominant
endoplasmic reticulum accumulation (our unpublished data), leading us to
conclude that the diffuse GFP-Ypt1p localization is cytoplasmic and represents
an increase in the soluble pool. In contrast, GFP-Ypt1p in the isogenic
wild-type control remains in Golgi cisternae after shift to 37°C for the
entire experiment (Figure 7C).
These results show that loss of Yip1p function can influence the localization
of the Rab protein Ypt1p. To confirm that the loss of Golgi Ypt1p localization
was not due to a generalized disruption of Golgi structure caused by the
yip1-4 allele, we also examined these cells with a Sec7p. Sec7p is an
abundant peripheral membrane protein of the Golgi
(Franzusoff et al.,
1991
), and, in a typical cell, Sec7p-DsRed labels cytoplasmic
spots that correspond to individual Golgi cisternae
(Preuss et al., 1992
;
Seron et al., 1998
).
With Sec7p-labeled Golgi in yip1-4 cells, there was no change in the
apparent number or intensity of fluorescent puncta after a shift to the
restrictive temperature (Figure
7D). These results indicate that the yip1 mutant allele
does not cause a generalized disruption of Golgi structure and are consistent
with a more selective action of this protein.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To explore the specific role of the lipid modification in Rab protein
function, we asked whether a single lipid geranylgeranyl group could
substitute for the two geranylgeranyl groups found on most Rab proteins, and,
if so, could a shorter lipid group such as a farnesyl group substitute for the
longer geranylgeranyl groups? We created Rab prenylation variants by replacing
the double cysteine motif at their C terminus with CAAX boxes to study the
localization and function of the singly prenylated Rab proteins. C-terminal
CTIM or CIIL box versions of the essential Rab genes YPT1 and
SEC4 were unable to function in vivo when expressed as the only copy
in the cell. Although Rab-GDI plays a critical role in the membrane targeting
and recycling of Rab proteins, it is also thought that the homologous protein
REP can function in this manner. Because REP is the chaperone that presents
the Rab protein to GGTaseII, it is thought that REP mediates the very first
membrane-targeting event in the existence of the Rab protein. If this is the
case, and if the REP-mediated targeting is critical, perhaps the CAAX box
variants we constructed were unable to function correctly because these
sequences are in vivo substrates for FTase and GGTaseI. To eliminate this
possibility we created C-terminal variants that contained a single
cysteine-to-serine point mutation of one of the residues that is prenylated by
GGTaseII. It has been previously demonstrated that such mutants remain the
substrates of a single round of prenylation by GGTaseII and so would exist as
a complex with REP, which could then target them to membranes
(Wilson et al.,
1996
). Such mutants would be singly geranylgeranylated exclusively
by GGTaseII in combination with REP so eliminating any contribution from
GGTaseI. Our finding that even singly geranylgeranylated YPT1 and
SEC4 variants that are the substrates of GGTaseII cannot function as
the only copy in the cell indicates that it is the specific double prenylation
modification that is required for full function. We did, however, uncover
differences in the mono-geranylgeranylated proteins that result from different
prenyltransferase enzymes. ypt1CIIL and
sec4CIIL, the substrates for either GGTaseI or GGTaseII,
were able to suppress temperature-sensitive alleles ypt1-3 and
sec4-8, while the exclusive GG-TaseII substrates
ypt1C205S and sec4C214S were not.
These data agree with previous studies demonstrating that Rab proteins mutated
to GGTaseI substrate CAAX boxes can in fact support function, provided that
sufficient Rab protein reaches the correct membrane
(Soldati et al.,
1993
; Overmeyer et
al., 2001
). It is possible that the
ypt1C205S and sec4C214S are not
released from REP after a single round of prenylation, because REP has been
reported to form a very tight, stable complex with mono-geranylgeranylated Rab
protein (Thoma et al.,
2001
), and this could explain differences observed between the two
set of mutants.
Using Ypt1p and Sec4p as examples, we also investigated whether the
prenylation variants we created are indeed modified by asking if they could
still partition into the detergent phase of a Triton X-114 partition. Each of
the prenyl variants was able to partition into the detergent phase, in
contrast to an unprenylated
CC mutant
(Figure 5). These data suggest
that the effects we observe in Rab protein functionality with these variants
can be attributed to the alternative Rab prenylation. Although other lipid
anchor sequences on Rab proteins receive lipid modifications, they do not lead
to correct function.
Why do mono-prenylated Rab proteins fail to function? One possibility is
that alternative lipid modifications fail to stably associate with membranes.
This may well be the case for farnesylated proteins (C15 moiety). However,
singly geranylgeranylated proteins, with their C20 lipid tails are more than
two log(P) units more nonpolar than farnesyl groups
(Black, 1992
).
Geranylgeranylation significantly enhances the bilayer partitioning ability of
the modified protein. Although mono-geranylgeranylated proteins have the
biophysical ability to stably associate with membranes, our data indicate that
they are nonfunctional because they are unable to localize to the correct
subcellular compartment. In each case examined, Sec4p, Ypt1p, Ypt6p, Ypt7p,
and Vps21p, the monoprenylated variants did not localize in the same manner as
their wild-type equivalents. Moreover, in the case of Sec4p, untagged prenyl
variants examined by indirect immunofluorescence, gave similar results
(Figure 4). These data suggest
that for Rab proteins, lipid modification plays dual functions. It is required
for both membrane association and localization or clustering; prenylation is
necessary for the former, and di-geranylgeranylation is required for the
latter.
How applicable are these results to Rab proteins in general? In this study,
we have examined the functionality of two different Rab proteins and the
localization of prenylation variants of five different Rab proteins to reach
our conclusion that dual prenylation is specifically required for Rab protein
function and localization. While preparing this article, we became aware of a
similar study in mammalian cells that reached the same conclusions
(Gomes et al., 2003
).
We therefore believe that our results show a common principle of Rab protein
function, namely, a specific requirement for double prenylation. The original
impetus for the experiments we report in this study was the desire to create
prenylated peptide constructs of Rab hypervariable sequences to examine the
possibility that such constructs might act as dominant inhibitors of
endogenous Rab membrane recruitment. We expected that singly
geranylgeranylated Rab proteins would be indistinguishable from wild type and
were surprised by our results that mono-prenylated Rab proteins were
nonfunctional. However, double prenylation is a characteristic hallmark of the
majority of Rab GTPase family members, a family that is conserved in all
eukaryotes. In fact, it would be surprising that a group of proteins would
evolve this specialized dual prenylation modification and the machinery to
produce it without a biological imperative.
We examined known Rab-interacting factors for the possible existence of
protein entities that recognize the specialized dual prenylation of Rab
proteins. We confined our list to factors conserved from yeast to human that
are known to require an intact C-terminal cysteine motif for productive Rab
protein interactions. The results of these experiments lead us to propose the
YIP1 family of proteins as potential candidates through which the
di-geranylgeranylation specificity is mediated. Yip1p was originally
identified as a factor specific for Ypt1p and Ypt31p interaction
(Yang et al., 1998
).
However, Sec4p is as homologous to Ypt1p and Ypt31p as either is to each
other, and it has become appreciated recently that Yip1p is capable of
pleiotropic Rab protein interactions
(Matern et al., 2000
;
Calero et al., 2002
),
which we confirm in this study. Our data show that Yip1p can interact with the
di-geranylgeranylated Rab proteins Ypt1p, Sec4p, Ypt31p, Vps21p, Ypt6p, Ypt7p,
Ypt52p, and Ypt53p. Yip1p does not interact with mono-geranylated Sec4p
proteins. It is also of note that several mammalian Rab proteins such as Rab8
contain CAAL motifs that are singly geranylgeranylated both by REP/GGTase II
and by GGTaseI (Wilson et al.,
1998
). We would predict that such proteins may be insensitive to
the impact of YIP1-like family members and demonstrated that such proteins are
unable to interact with human YIP1A, although, as we have demonstrated for
Sec4p mutants with CAAX boxes, Rab-GDI can still bind these monoprenylated Rab
proteins. It should be noted that Sec4p is more homologous in primary sequence
to either Rab8 or Rab13 (49.3 and 52.2% identity, respectively) than to Ypt1p
(44.4% identity), its closest homolog in yeast. The fact that both human YIP1A
and yeast Yip1p are capable of interactions with Sec4p, Rab1a, Ypt1p, and
Ypt31p, all di-geranylgeranylated members of the same Rab subfamily
(Pereira-Leal and Seabra,
2000
), but not with mono-geranylgeranylated Rab8 or Rab13, leads
us to conclude that it is the di-geranylgeranylation that is the critical
factor for YIP1 interaction. The relevance of our findings showing
cross-species protein interaction is reflected in our demonstration showing
the conservation of YIP1 protein function. Human YIP1A can fully substitute
for YIP1, an essential gene in yeast. Together with our data showing no
interaction between Yip1p and mono-geranylgeranylated Sec4p variants
(Figure 7C), these results show
that di-geranylgeranylation is critical for interactions between Yip1p and Rab
GTPases and additionally demonstrate that the interactions of Yip1p with Rab
GTPases are well conserved in evolution. Due to our finding that the
requirement of di-geranylgeranylation for Rab protein function correlates with
specific Rab protein localization, we sought to examine whether Yip1p might
play a role in Rab protein localization. Using the mutant allele,
yip1-4, we demonstrate that loss of functional Yip1p has an impact on
the localization of Ypt1p, shifting it from Golgi localization to a diffuse
pool. These results demonstrate that Yip1p can impact Ypt1p localization in
vivo. Together with our results showing loss of localization of the
mono-prenylated Rab proteins, and the failure of such mutants to interact with
Yip1p, these data suggest that Yip1p and other YIP1-family members are
candidates for factors through which di-geranylgeranylated Rab proteins work
to achieve correct membrane localization. It should be noted, however, that in
this study we only tested known Rab-interacting factors, and there may be
additional proteins present in the proteome that also specifically recognize
digeranylgeranylated Rabs and aid in their correct localization. YIP1
is an essential gene, and yip1-4 cannot be suppressed by
overexpression of other YIP1 family members in yeast (our unpublished data).
These data are surprising considering that an ability to promiscuously
associate with dual prenylated Rab proteins is the only known function for
YIP1-family proteins and suggest either that Yip1p contains additional unique
functions or that it interacts with, and is responsible for, an essential Rab
protein. Four members of the YIP1-protein family and 11 Rab proteins have been
identified in yeast. YIP1-family members associate both among themselves as
well as with other proteins (Matern et
al., 2000
; Calero et
al., 2001
; Calero and
Collins, 2002
), and one possibility may be that a combinatorial
assortment of YIP1 family complexes confer specificity toward different Rab
proteins. In vivo, the accessibility of Yip1p to Rab proteins may be
restricted by its localization and interacting partners.
In summary, our findings demonstrate a specific lipid requirement of double geranylgeranylation for the Rab GTPase class of proteins to function correctly and show that double geranylgeranyl groups are required for the Rab protein to localize to its characteristic organelle membrane. The exact mechanism by which the di-geranylgeranylated proteins act to achieve correct localization remains to be uncovered. Although different prenylation will affect the membrane-partitioning ability of the modified protein, isoprenylation may have an additional role and be recognized by another protein. Our data indicate the YIP1 family as possible effector candidates for the di-geranylgeranylated Rab proteins, although further work is needed to explore the biochemical basis and physiological relevance of the YIP1Rab interactions.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Abbreviations used: 5-FOA, 5-fluorooroic acid; FTase, farnesyl transferase; GDI, GDP-dissociation inhibitor; GGTase I, geranylgeranyl transferase type I; GGTaseII, type II geranylgeranyl transferase; GFP, green fluorescent protein; mAb, monoclonal antibody; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; REP, Rab escort protein; Y2H, yeast two-hybrid.
Corresponding author. E-mail address:
rnc8{at}cornell.edu.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|