|
|
|
|
Vol. 14, Issue 6, 2559-2569, June 2003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||


* Research and Education Center for Genetic Information, Nara Institute of
Science and Technology, 8916-5 Takayama, Ikoma, Nara 630-0101, Japan;
Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
08544
Submitted November 5, 2002;
Revised January 27, 2003;
Accepted February 11, 2003
Monitoring Editor: Elizabeth A. Craig
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In mammalian cells, accumulation of unfolded proteins initiates signaling
from the ER via more complicated pathways. Two homologues of Ire1, Ire1
and Ire1
, have been identified
(Tirasophon et al.,
1998
; Wang et al.,
1998
; Iwawaki et al.,
2001
). According to recent reports
(Yoshida et al.,
2001
; Calfon et al.,
2002
), IRE1 functions to promote splicing of an mRNA encoding the
transcription factor XBP1. This Ire1-XBP1 signaling pathway is reported to act
synergistically with another signaling pathway involving an ER-located
transmembrane protein ATF6 to promote the mammalian UPR
(Yoshida et al.,
2001
; Shen et al.,
2001
; Lee et al.,
2002
). Moreover, accumulation of unfolded proteins in the
mammalian ER attenuates bulk protein synthesis. This occurs by phosphorylation
of the eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2 subunit by PERK (PKR-like ER
kinase), a transmembrane kinase containing an Ire1-like lumenal domain
(Harding et al.,
1999
) and by cleavage of the 28S rRNA by Ire1
(Iwawaki et al.,
2001
).
Kar2 is the yeast orthologue of mammalian BiP, an ER-resident member of the
Hsp70 family (Normington et al.,
1989
; Rose et al.,
1989
), and the expression of KAR2 gene is upregulated by
the UPR. Like other members of the family, Kar2 has an amino-terminal ATPase
domain adjacent to a substrate-binding domain
(Figure 1; Bukau and Horwich, 1998
). It is
believed that the ATPase domain is involved in regulating the interaction
between the substrate-binding domain and unfolded protein substrates. Because
KAR2 is essential for viability, studies of its physiological
functions have been performed primarily using conditional lethal kar2
alleles. When cultured at the restrictive temperature, some of the
temperature-sensitive kar2 mutant strains exhibit a block in the
translocation of secretory proteins into the ER
(Vogel et al., 1990
;
Sanders et al., 1992
;
Brodsky et al., 1995
).
Several molecular mechanisms have been proposed to explain the function of
Kar2 in the protein translocation machinery
(Hamman et al., 1998
;
Matlack et al.,
1999
). Kar2 has also been shown to serve as a molecular chaperone
during protein folding in the ER. For instance, refolding of carboxypeptidase
Y (CPY), after denaturation by dithiothreitol (DTT), was impaired in some
kar2 mutant strains (Simons
et al., 1995
). In addition, other reports implicate Kar2
involvement in ER-associated protein degradation (ERAD;
Plemper et al., 1997
;
Brodsky et al., 1999
;
Nishikawa et al.,
2001
).
|
We have proposed that KAR2 is not only a UPR target, but is itself
a critical negative regulator of the UPR pathway
(Okamura et al.,
2000
). In the current model, Kar2 associates with Ire1 to repress
the activation of Ire1 in nonstressed cells, and in response to accumulation
of unfolded proteins in the ER, Kar2 dissociates from Ire1, resulting in
dimerization and activation of Ire1. This proposed mechanism, hereafter called
the BiP/Kar2-dependent Ire1 regulation, is supported by several findings in
our previous studies in yeast (Kohno
et al., 1993
; Okamura
et al., 2000
). First, overproduction of Kar2 in yeast
cells was shown to attenuate the UPR. Furthermore, Kar2 coimmunoprecipitated
with Ire1 from lysates of nonstressed cells. Notably, the amount of Kar2 that
coimmunoprecipitated with Ire1 extremely decreased when cells were cultured in
the presence of reagents that activate the UPR pathway. Similar observations
were reported by A. Bertolotti et al.
(2000
), suggesting that BiP
acts to regulate Ire1 and PERK in mammalian cells. Although these studies
provided correlative support for the model, firm confirmation awaits direct
evidence that the binding state of Ire1 by BiP/Kar2 regulates its
activity.
To obtain the further evidence of the BiP/Kar2-dependent Ire1 regulation model, we used a different approach in which the phenotypes of kar2 mutations were analyzed. Mutations stabilizing Kar2 association with Ire1 impaired UPR signaling even under conditions of ER stress. Conversely, mutations disrupting this association constitutively activate the pathway. Our results suggest a molecular mechanism by which unfolded proteins are detected by the sensor protein in the UPR pathway.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Plasmids
The XbaI site in the HIS3 centromeric vector pRS313
(Sikorski and Hieter, 1989
)
was converted to SphI by insertion of the appropriate
oligonucleotide. The vector was then digested with BamHI and
SphI, and a 5.6-kbp BamHI-SphI DNA fragment
containing the IRE1 gene from plasmid pERN1-EM (a generous gift of
Dr. K. Mori, Graduate School of Biostudies, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan;
Mori et al., 1993
)
was inserted to generate plasmid pRS313-IRE1. An SphI recognition
sequence was inserted into the site 5'-adjacent to the hemagglutinin
(HA) epitope coding sequence on plasmid phIRE1-HA2 (a generous gift of A.
Hosoda, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Japan), and a 0.17-kbp
SphI-NotI DNA fragment encoding three tandem copies of the
HA epitope (YPYDVPDYAGS) followed by a termination codon was isolated. The
termination codon (TAA) of the IRE1 gene in pRS313-IRE1 was converted
to an SphI site by PCR mediated mutagenesis, the resulting plasmid
was digested with SphI and NotI, and the 0.17-kbp DNA
fragment was ligated into these sites. From the resulting plasmid, a 4.9-kbp
DNA fragment encoding Ire1 tagged with a C-terminal triple HA epitope tag was
excised by digesting with BamHI and NotI and cloned into an
URA3 2-µm vector pRS426
(Christianson et al.,
1992
) to obtain plasmid pRS426-IRE1HA.
An URA3 2-µm plasmid pCZY1
(Mori et al., 1992
)
containing a lacZ reporter gene driven by the CYC1 core
promoter fused with the UPRE was generously provided by Dr. K. Mori and used
to monitor cellular UPR activity. A 2-µm plasmid pYPR3841U (a generous gift
of Dr. M. Takagi, Department of Biotechnology, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo,
Japan) was derived from pYPR3841
(Umebayashi et al.,
1997
) by replacement of the TRP1 selectable maker with
URA3 and used for cellular expression of the
pro from the
GAL1 promoter. pKAR2HSE-lacZ (Oka
et al., 1997
) is an URA3 2-µm plasmid
containing a lacZ reporter gene driven by the CYC1 core
promoter fused with the KAR2 heat shock element (HSE).
Preparation of Cell Lysates, Immunoprecipitation, and Western
Blotting
Yeast cells (10 OD600 equivalent) carrying pRS426-IRE1HA were
harvested, washed with PBS, and suspended in 200 µl of buffer A (50 mM
Tris-Cl, pH 7.9, 5 mM EDTA, and 1% Triton X-100) supplemented by protease
inhibitors (2 mM phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride, 10 µg/ml each of
pepstatin, leupeptin, and aprotinin). Glass beads (0.5 mm) were added up to
the meniscus. The cells were broken by vortexing six times for 30 s each at
maximum speed. After removal of the glass beads, the cell lysates were
clarified by centrifugation (15,000 x g for 10 min).
The cell lysates were then diluted with 800 µl buffer B (the same composition as buffer A except containing 180 mM NaCl and 6% skim milk) and incubated for 1 h at 4°C with 2 µg of the anti-HA mAb 12CA5 (Roche Diagnostics, Basel, Switzerland), followed by the addition of 15 µl of protein Aconjugated Sepharose beads (Protein A Sepharose 4 FF; Amersham Biosciences, Uppsala, Sweden). After further incubation at 4°C for 1 h, the Sepharose beads were collected by centrifugation, washed five times with buffer C (the same composition as buffer B except for containing no skim milk), and used as immunoprecipitates.
For cells carrying pYPR3841U or the control empty vector pRS426, lysates were prepared as described above except that buffer C supplemented by the protease inhibitors was used instead of buffer A. Next, lysates (190 µl) were ultracentrifuged (Beckman TLA-100.3 rotor, 100,000 x g, 15 min, 4°C), and both supernatant and pellet fractions were collected. The pellet fractions were washed twice with buffer C, and resuspended in 190 µl of buffer C.
The samples described above were added to an equal volume of gel loading
buffer containing 125 mM Tris-HCl (pH 6.8), 20% glycerol, 4% SDS, 20 mM DTT,
and 0.02% bromophenol blue. Then they were incubated at 95°C for 2 min and
fractionated on 8% SDS-PAGE gels. Proteins were then transferred to
nitrocellulose membranes (PROTORAN; Schleicher & Schuell, Dassel, Germany)
by electrophoresis at 1 mA/cm2 for 1.5 h in transfer buffer
containing 48 mM Tris, 38.6 mM glycine, 0.037% SDS, and 20% methanol. The
blots were blocked overnight at 4°C in PBS containing 0.1% Tween 20 and 5%
skim milk (blocking solution). The following day, the blots were incubated
with the same blocking solution, but containing the primary antibody (12CA5
anti-HA antibody at 0.4 µg/ml, rabbit anti-Kar2 antiserum
[Tokunaga et al.,
1992
] at a 1:1000 dilution, or rabbit anti-RNAP-I antiserum [a
generous gift of Dr. M. Takagi; Fukuda
et al., 1994
]) at a 1:5000 dilution. Incubation was for 1
h at room temperature. The blots were subsequently washed five times with PBS
containing 0.1% Tween 20 (washing solution) at room temperature for 3 min
each. The blots were next incubated with a 1:1000 dilution of horseradish
peroxidasecoupled, goat anti-rabbit or anti-mouse IgG (Amersham
Biosciences) in blocking solution for 1 h at room temperature. The blots were
then washed five times with the washing solution at room temperature for 3 min
each, and specific protein bands were detected using enhanced
chemiluminescence (ECL; Amersham Biosciences) and x-ray films (RX-U; Fuji
Photo Film, Ashigara, Japan).
In case of chemical cross-linking experiments, cells (25 OD600 equivalent) were suspended in 200 µl of PBS containing 1% Triton X-100 and the protease inhibitors and were broken by the glass beads. After clarification by centrifugation (3000 x g for 30 s), 90 µl of the lysates was subjected to chemical cross-linking reaction with 2 mM dithiobissuccinimidyl propionate (DSP; 1.8 µl of 100 mM stock [freshly prepared in DMSO] was added) at 27°C for 30 min. The reaction was quenched by the addition of 90 µl of 1 M Tris-Cl, pH 7.5, and the samples were then ultracentrifuged (Beckman TLA-100.3 rotor, 100,000 x g, 15 min, 4°C). The pellet fractions were dissolved in 100 µl of resuspend buffer (50 mM Tris-Cl, pH 7.5, 1 mM EDTA, 1% SDS) by incubation at 95°C for 3 min, diluted by 900 µl of buffer C, and incubated with the anti-Kar2 antiserum (1:120 dilution) or a control preimmune serum for 1 h at 4°C. The immunocomplexes were collected by protein Aconjugated Sepharose beads and analyzed by Western blotting as described above.
RNA Analysis
DNA probes for Northern blot analysis were prepared by PCR amplification of
yeast genomic DNA. The HAC1, KAR2, and SSA probes,
respectively, correspond to nucleotide -11654 of HAC1,
nucleotide 92047 of KAR2, and nucleotide 10161756 of
SSA1.
Total RNA was prepared using the hot phenol method
(Collart and Oliviero, 1993
).
For Northern blot analysis, 5 µg of total RNA was separated on a 1%
agarose, 1.8% formaldehyde gel and transferred to a nylon membrane (Hybond-N;
Amersham Biosciences). The membrane was prehybridized in 500 mM sodium
phosphate, pH 7.0, 1 mM EDTA, and 7% SDS. The membrane was then incubated with
the random primed 32P-labeled DNA probe. After washing, the
membrane was exposed to an imaging screen (BAS-MS2040; Fuji), and signal
intensity was quantified using a Fuji BAS2500 image analyzer. The percentage
of HAC1 mRNA cleavage was calculated using the equation
(It - I u)/It
x 100%, where It is the intensity of total
HAC1 mRNA species and Iu is the intensity of
uncleaved HAC1 (HAC1u) mRNA.
Assay of Cellular
-Galactosidase Activity
-Galactosidase activity of cells was determined using the protocol of
Kaiser et al. (1994
).
Cells (0.5 OD600 equivalent) were suspended in 800 µl of Z
buffer (60 mM Na2HPO4, 40 mM
NaH2PO4, 10 mM KCl, 1 mM MgSO4, 0.27%
2-mercaptoethanol, pH 7.0), and 20 µl of 0.1% SDS and 50 µl of
chloroform was added. The mixture was vortexed vigorously for 20 s. After
equilibration at 28°C for 5 min,
o-nitrophenyl-
-D-galactoside was added to a final
concentration of 0.8 mg/ml. The reaction was stopped at various times by
adding 0.5 ml of 1 M Na2CO3, and the concentration of
the product, o-nitrophenol (ONP), was measured by optical density at
420 nm. One unit of
-galactosidase activity is defined as 1 nmol of
ONP/min of reaction for 1 ml of culture at 1 OD600 unit.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
We first wished to determine whether any of the mutations altered the
cell's ability to regulate the UPR pathway. To monitor cellular activity of
this pathway, we used a lacZ reporter plasmid for expression of
-galactosidase under the control of the UPRE. At first, cells carrying
this plasmid were cultured in SC medium at 23°C and shifted to 37°C
for 200 min. Extrinsic ER stress was imposed by 2 µg/ml tunicamycin, an
N-glycosylation inhibitor
(Takatsuki et al.,
1975
), which was added immediately after the temperature shift. In
the absence of tunicamycin,
-galactosidase activity was slightly higher
in kar2 type A mutant cells than in wild-type cells
(Figure 2A). However, in the
presence of tunicamycin, a strong induction was observed in the wild-type, but
was completely lacking in the kar2 type A mutant cells. In contrast,
constitutively high
-galactosidase activity was observed in the
kar2 type S mutant cells, regardless of the presence of tunicamycin.
This activity was similar to that seen in tunicamycin-treated wild-type
cells.
|
As a control, we also monitored UPR activity at the permissive temperature.
For reasons unknown, we were not able to detect any
-galactosidase
activity in any of the seven strains tested in this study when cultured at
23°C in SC medium (unpublished data), and we suspected that the
UPRE-lacZ reporter does not work in this culturing condition.
Therefore, the cells were cultured in SD medium for monitoring the UPR at the
permissive temperature. As shown in the left panel of
Figure 2B, all of the
kar2 mutant strains as well as the wild-type strains exhibited almost
normal induction of UPR by tunicamycin at 23°C. However, when cells were
cultured at 37°C, the UPR was not induced by tunicamycin in the type A
mutant cells, but was constitutively active in the type S mutant cells
(Figure 2B, right panel). It
should be noted that expression of
-galactosidase from this
UPRE-lacZ reporter somehow depends on the strain background. The W303
background strains exhibited higher
-galactosidase activity than the
MS10 background strains.
Because the HAC1 mRNA precursor (uninduced form;
HAC1u; Cox and Walter
(1996
)) is the substrate of
Ire1, a more direct measure of Ire1 activity is HAC1u
splicing. For this, we monitored HAC1u cleavage by
Northern blot analysis (Figure 2, C and
D). We cultured cells in rich YPD medium at 23°C, shifted to
37°C for 60 min, and then extracted total cellular RNA. ER stress was
imposed by the addition of 2 µg/ml tunicamycin immediately after the
temperature shift. As expected, in the wild-type cells,
HAC1u was effectively cleaved and converted to the mature
HAC1 mRNA (induced form: HAC1i;
Cox and Walter, 1996
) only in
the presence of tunicamycin. In the type A mutant cells, partial cleavage of
HAC1u was observed even in the absence of tunicamycin, and
addition of tunicamycin did not enhance the extent of cleavage. In contrast,
the type S mutant cells exhibited nearly complete cleavage of
HAC1u both in the absence and presence of tunicamycin.
Importantly, these results are consistent with the observations obtained by
the UPRE-lacZ reporter assay described above. We therefore concluded
that at the restrictive temperature, Ire1 is constitutively and highly
activated in the type S mutant strains and constitutively repressed in the
type A mutant strains.
Impaired Association and Dissociation of Kar2 and Ire1 in
kar2 Mutant Strains
We next analyzed the in vivo physical interaction between Kar2 and Ire1 by
employing a coimmunoprecipitation assay
(Figure 3). Ire1 bearing a
C-terminal triple influenza virus HA epitope tag (Ire1-HA) was expressed in
the kar2 mutant and control wild-type strains. Our previous study had
indicated that Ire1-HA functions similar to wild-type Ire1 to transmit the
unfolded protein signal across the ER membrane
(Okamura et al.,
2000
). In this study, cells carrying an Ire1-HA expression plasmid
were cultured in SC medium at 23°C and shifted to 37°C for 60 min, and
lysates were prepared. ER stress was induced by the addition of 2 µg/ml
tunicamycin immediately after the temperature shift. Anti-HA Western blot
analysis of the cell lysates indicated that Ire1-HA was expressed at similar
levels in all of the kar2 mutant and control wild-type strains
(Figure 3, uppermost panel).
The precursor form of Kar2 (pre-Kar2) was detected in lysates from the type A
mutant cells by anti-Kar2 Western blotting
(Figure 3, second panel, lanes
49), suggesting that protein translocation is impaired in these cells
(Vogel et al.,
1990
).
|
The cell lysates were next subjected to anti-HA immunoprecipitation.
Anti-HA Western blot analysis of the immunoprecipitates showed that nearly
equal amounts of Ire1-HA were immunoprecipitated from each lysate
(Figure 3, third panel). Kar2
in the immunocomplexes was then detected by Western blot analysis. From
lysates prepared from wild-type cells cultured under nonstressed conditions,
Kar2 was found to be complexed with Ire1-HA
(Figure 3, lowest panel, lanes
2 and 12). Consistent with our previous observation
(Okamura et al.,
2000
), the amount of coimmunoprecipitated Kar2 was sharply reduced
in these cells after treatment by tunicamycin
(Figure 3, lowest panel, lanes
3 and 13). Kar2 was undetectable in a control strain not expressing Ire1-HA,
showing that the signal is specific (Figure
3, lowest panel, lane 1). When the assay was performed using
lysates from the mutant strains, Kar2 displayed distinctly different binding
characteristics to Ire1, depending on the strain. Treatment of the type A
mutant cells with tunicamycin did not cause dissociation of Kar2 from Ire1
(Figure 3, lowest panel,
compare lanes 5-4, 7-6, and 9-8). In type S mutants, little association
between the two proteins was observed even when cultured in the absence of
tunicamycin (Figure 3, lowest
panel, lanes 10 and 14).
Type S Mutant Strains Exhibit Impaired Association between Kar2 and a
Model Chaperone Substrate
We next examined in vivo association of Kar2 with a model unfolded protein.
Aspartic proteinase-I (RNAP-I) of the filamentous fungus Rhizopus
niveus is a secretory protein synthesized as a precursor form containing
a presequence (translocation signal; 21 amino acid residues) and prosequence
(45 amino acid residues) in the N-terminus of the mature portion (323 amino
acid residues). When the fulllength form of the RNAP-I precursor is expressed
heterologously in yeast cells, the protein is secreted extracellularly as the
mature form (Horiuchi et al.,
1990
). The prosequence of RNAP-I, similar to that of other
secretory proteins, acts to support proper folding of the mature protein
(Fukuda et al.,
1994
). Therefore, a truncated mutant RNAP-I lacking the
prosequence (
pro) remains incompletely folded and aggregates in the ER
when expressed in yeast cells (Umebayashi
et al., 1997
). Kar2 has been shown to coaggregate with
pro (Umebayashi et al.,
1997
), and we have used this heterologous protein as a model
chaperone substrate to monitor in vivo association with Kar2.
As shown in Figure 4,
pro was expressed from the GAL1 promoter in the kar2
mutant and wild-type strains. As a control, yeast strains were transformed
with an empty vector. Cells were cultured in galactose-based medium (SCG) at
23°C and shifted to 37°C for 60 min, except for the kar2-133
mutant, which was shifted to 34°C in order to avoid
pro independent
aggregation of the Kar2-133 protein at 37°C. Lysates of the cells were
then subjected to ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g, and both
supernatant and pellet fractions were collected. Note that to dissolve
membraneous components, the cell lysates were prepared in the presence of the
nonionic detergent Triton X-100. AntiRNAP-I Western blot analysis of
the supernatant and pellet fractions showed that
pro was almost
perfectly aggregated in the wild-type and type S mutant cells
(Figure 4A). In the type A
mutant cells,
pro was also detected in the supernatant fractions.
Although we speculated that the accumulation of this soluble version of
pro might be caused by translocation block in these mutant cells, a
protease protection assay showed that this soluble
pro resides in a
closed membranous compartment (unpublished data). Thus the soluble
pro
may locate in the ER lumen in the type A mutant cells under the restricted
temperature by unknown reasons. On the other hand, anti-Kar2 Western blotting
showed little or no accumulation of pre-Kar2 even in the type A mutant cells
(Figure 4B, lanes 38).
This may be because cells grow slower in galactose medium than in glucose
medium. Western blotting of the pellet fractions with anti-Kar2 showed that
Kar2 coaggregates with
pro in both wild-type cells
(Figure 4B, lower panel,
compare lanes 2-1 and 12-11) and type A mutant cells
(Figure 4B, lower panel,
compare lanes 4-3, 6-5, and 8-7). As shown in
Figure 4C,
pro was
cross-linked with Kar2 by DSP, which indicates that Kar2 directly contacts
pro. Furthermore,
pro cofractionated with Kar2 in a sucrose
gradient analysis of the microsomal fraction, which suggests that
pro
and Kar2 are present in the same complex
(Umebayashi et al.,
1997
). In contrast,
pro-dependent aggregation of Kar2 was
not observed in the type S mutant cells
(Figure 4B, lanes 9, 10, 13,
and 14).
|
Upregulation of KAR2 Transcription in kar2 Mutants Is Due to Both the
UPR and the Heat Shock Response
It has been previously reported that mutation of KAR2 results in
its own transcriptional induction
(Scidmore et al.,1993
for kar2-159 and Kohno et
al., 1993
for kar21). Therefore we monitored
KAR2 mRNA abundance in all of the kar2 mutant strains used
in this study. As shown in Figure
5A, the kar2 mutant and wild-type strains were cultured
at 23°C or shifted to 37°C, and gene expression was examined by
Northern blotting. The mRNAs were then quantitated and normalized to
ACT1 mRNA (Figure 5B,
left). Culturing at 37°C for 60 min caused only weak induction of the
KAR2 gene in the wild-type strains. In contrast, all of the
kar2 mutant strains exhibited about twofold higher expression of the
KAR2 gene than the wild-type strains when cultured at 23°C and
exhibited greatly enhanced expression of the KAR2 gene when shifted
to 37°C. However, as described above, the type A and type S mutant strains
have different unfolded protein responses, implying that this transcriptional
upregulation of the KAR2 gene in kar2 mutant strains cannot
be explained simply by activation of the UPR pathway. Regulation of the
KAR2 gene involves not only the UPRE but also the heat shock element
(HSE), which is present in its promoter region
(Mori et al., 1992
;
Kohno et al., 1993
).
We therefore examined whether the heat shock response pathway is activated in
kar2 mutant strains. SSA1, 2, 3, and 4 are highly
similar genes encoding cytosolic Hsp70, and all except SSA2 are
induced by the heat shock response
(Ziegelhoffer and Craig,
1997
). Northern blotting using a probe for SSA1 revealed
enhanced SSA expression in type A mutant cells cultured at 37°C
for 60 min, but not in the wild-type or kar2-1 cells
(Figure 5, A and B). In
addition, the SSA genes were highly expressed both at 23 and 37°C
in the kar2-133 cells (Figure 5, A
and B). Activation of the heat shock response pathway in the type
A and kar2-133 mutant strains was confirmed by an HSE-lacZ
reporter assay, in which expression of lacZ is under the control of
the KAR2 HSE. As shown in Figure
5C, both the type A and kar2-133 mutant strains exhibited
higher lacZ expression than the wild-type strain, when they were
cultured at 37°C. These observations indicate that KAR2 mRNA
induction in these mutant strains is at least partially caused by the heat
shock response.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Hence, we sought to provide more definitive evidence for the
BiP/Kar2-dependent Ire1 regulation model. In the present study, we analyzed a
pool of KAR2 mutants that display allele-specific phenotypes with
respect to Ire1 association and activation. As shown in
Figure 2, examination of five
kar2 mutant alleles revealed two different types of UPR
abnormalities, as monitored by the UPRE-lacZ reporter assay and
Northern blot analysis for HAC1u mRNA cleavage. When
cultured at the restrictive temperature of 37°C, the kar2 type A
mutant strains (Figure 1)
exhibited weak activation of the UPR pathway that was not enhanced by
treatment with tunicamycin. In contrast, the type S mutant strains
(Figure 1) showed high
activation of the UPR pathway both in the absence and presence of tunicamycin.
We then investigated the in vivo interaction between Kar2 and Ire1 by
monitoring coimmunoprecipitation of Kar2 with HA-tagged Ire1 from cell lysates
(Figure 3). Consistent with our
previous report (Okamura et al.,
2000
), dissociation of Kar2 from Ire1 in response to tunicamycin
was clearly observed in the wild-type cells. In contrast, this dissociation
was not observed in the type A mutant cells, whereas in the type S mutant
cells, association between Kar2 and Ire1 was almost undetectable even in the
absence of tunicamycin. One attractive interpretation of these results, which
we believe most likely, is that the abnormalities in the UPR pathway observed
in kar2 mutants are the results of altered association and
dissociation between Kar2 and Ire1. This mechanism would be consistent with
the BiP/Kar2-dependent Ire1 regulation model.
We should note that Kar2 has multiple biological roles in the cell, as
described in the Introduction, and thus other interpretations for the UPR
abnormalities in the kar2 mutant strains are possible. Because Kar2
acts to promote both proper folding and ERAD of unfolded proteins
(Simons et al., 1995
;
Plemper et al., 1997
;
Brodsky et al., 1999
;
Nishikawa et al.,
2001
), it is likely that mutations in the KAR2 gene cause
activation of the UPR pathway through increased amount of unfolded proteins in
the ER. Indeed, all of the kar2 mutant strains displayed higher
activation of the UPR pathway than the wild-type strains when cultured at
37°C in the absence of tunicamycin
(Figure 2). However, this idea
alone does not explain the different levels of UPR activity between the type A
and S mutant strains. In addition, Kar2 plays important roles in the protein
translocation machinery (Hamman et
al., 1998
; Matlack et
al., 1999
). As shown in the second panel of
Figure 3, pre-Kar2 accumulated
in the type A mutant cells but not in the wild-type or type S mutant cells
when cultured at 37°C. We also observed accumulation of an unglycosylated
form of CPY only in the type A mutant cells (unpublished data). These findings
are consistent with previous reports
(Vogel et al., 1990
;
Sanders et al., 1992
)
and suggest that type A and type S mutants correspond to the class I and class
II kar2 mutants, respectively, defined by Brodsky and Rose
(1997
), based on their
phenotypes. These observations strongly suggest that protein translocation
into the ER is blocked only in the type A mutant strains. Thus, it is possible
that in Type A mutants, protein influx into the ER is reduced to the extent
that even under ER-stressed conditions unfolded proteins do not accumulate to
levels sufficient to activate the UPR pathway. Therefore, as we discussed
below, we think that experimental approaches not involving kar2
mutant strains are required for further support of the BiP/Kar2-dependent Ire1
regulation model.
We next investigated the in vivo association of Kar2 mutant proteins with
chaperone substrate using
pro as a model unfolded protein. As shown in
Figure 4, coaggregation of Kar2
with
pro was observed in the wild-type and type A mutant cells, but not
in the type S mutant cells. Impaired association of Kar2 with its chaperone
substrate in the type S mutant strains is reasonable because these
kar2 mutant alleles carry single-point mutations corresponding to the
Kar2 substrate-binding domain (Figure
1; Bukau and Horwich,
1998
). On the other hand, te Heesen and Aebi
(1994
) expressed a
nonglycosylatable mutant version of CPY (CPY*) in several
kar2 mutant strains and detected a complex of CPY* and
Kar2 in kar2-159 cells but not in wild-type or kar2-1 cells.
Furthermore, Simons et al.
(1995
) reported that in vivo
association of Kar2 with DTT-denatured CPY was enhanced in kar2-159
and kar2-113 mutants. Thus it is likely that dissociation between
Kar2 and its chaperone substrate is impaired in the type A mutant strains.
This idea is further supported by the low affinity of purified Kar2159
protein to ATP (Brodsky et al.,
1995
), because in Hsp70 chaperones, binding of ATP to the ATPase
domain promotes release of substrate from the substrate-binding domain
(Bukau and Horwich, 1998
). In
the case of kar2-113, Brodsky et al.
(1995
) reported no defect in
ATP binding or ATPase activity with purified Kar2-113 protein. Thus the
abovementioned observation in kar2-113 strain may be caused by
impaired interaction of the Kar2113 ATPase domain to
cochaperone(s).
It is notable that the type S Kar2 mutant proteins showed defective association with both Ire1 and a model unfolded protein. In addition, the type A Kar2 mutant proteins, of which dissociation from Ire1 was impaired, are reported to exhibit insufficient release of unfolded proteins. Thus it is likely that Ire1 association with Kar2 is analogous or identical to that of a chaperone substrate. On the basis of this idea, we envision that Ire1 competes with unfolded proteins for binding to the same site on Kar2. This is consistent with the BiP/Kar2-dependent Ire1 regulation model and explains the various results reported in this study. The explanation for the results in this study is presented in Figure 6. In wild-type cells under nonstressed conditions, Kar2 binds with Ire1 and represses Ire1 activity. In ER-stressed conditions, unfolded proteins compete with Ire1 for binding to Kar2, Ire1 is released and activated, and activated Ire1 in turn induces the UPR signaling pathway (Figure 6A). In contrast, type A mutant Kar2 binds constitutively to its chaperone substrates, including Ire1, and does not release them even under ER-stressed conditions. This results in the constitutive repression of Ire1 activity (Figure 6B). In the third case, Type S mutant Kar2 binds poorly with its chaperone substrates, and this results in free Ire1 molecules and constitutive induction of the UPR signaling pathway even in the absence of ER stress (Figure 6C).
|
This interpretation implies that the major role of the Ire1 lumenal domain
may merely be homodimerization, which is inhibited by Kar2. Generally
speaking, the association of proteins involves interactions between their
hydrophobic segments, which are often masked by Hsp70 chaperones. Thus it may
be possible to sustain the function of Ire1 by a replacement of its lumenal
domain with another dimerforming polypeptide. Indeed, Liu et al.
(2000
) reported that a
chimeric protein in which the lumenal domain of Ire1 was replaced with a
functional leucine zipper motif from the transcription factor Maf or Jun was
able to moderately activate the UPR pathway in response to ER stress. However,
in view of the strong response of native Ire1 to unfolded proteins, we believe
that its lumenal domain has additional properties that further facilitate its
function as a sensor. For instance, the balance between the rates of Ire1
homodimerization and Kar2-Ire1 association could be an important factor in
determining Ire1 activation in response to accumulated unfolded proteins.
Both our present and previously published observations indicate that any
mutation of KAR2 results in induction of the KAR2 gene,
especially at the restrictive temperature
(Figure 5;
Kohno et al., 1993
;
Scidmore et al.,
1993
). We also observed that the heat shock response pathway is
highly activated in the type A and kar2-133 strains but not in the
wild-type or kar2-1 strains, as monitored by expression of the
SSA genes and by an HSE-lacZ reporter assay
(Figure 5). This indicates that
both the UPR pathway and the heat shock response pathway contribute to the
upregulation of the KAR2 gene expression in kar2 mutant
strains, albeit this contribution varies with the particular mutant. It should
be noted that generally speaking, heat shock induced by shifting cells to high
temperature is quickly attenuated even if culturing at this temperature is
continued. Indeed, we could not detect induction of the SSA genes by
culturing the wild-type cells at 37°C for 60 min (see
Figure 5, A and B). One
possible explanation for the high state of activation of the heat shock
response pathway in the type A mutant strains cultured at 37°C is that
untranslocated secretory and membrane proteins accumulate and act as unfolded
cytosolic proteins to induce this pathway
(Morimoto, 1997
;
Oka et al., 1997
).
However, we are currently unable to explain the reason why the heat shock
response pathway is upregulated by the kar2-133 mutation but not by
the kar21 mutation both at 23 and 37°C.
In conclusion, we believe our findings in the present study are strong
evidence to support the BiP/Kar2-dependent Ire1 regulation model and suggest
that recognition of unfolded proteins by the UPR pathway is based on
competition between Ire1 and unfolded proteins for binding with Kar2.
Interestingly, Shen et al.
(2002
) have recently proposed
that BiP negatively regulates ATF6 activity. Thus, it appears that negative
regulation by BiP/Kar2 is a common feature of transmembrane signal transducers
for the ER stress response.
To clarify the detailed mechanism by which Ire1 is regulated by BiP/Kar2,
we think that additional experimental approaches are needed. Characterization
of the purified Ire1 lumenal domain, such as undertaken by Liu et al.
(2002
), may be an important
experimental approach. Furthermore, mutational analysis of the Ire1 lumenal
domain, an effort we are currently pursuing, may also provide new insights
into the molecular mechanism regulating the Ire1 activity.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
pro, truncated mutant RNAP-I lacking the
prosequence.
Corresponding author. E-mail address:
kkouno{at}bs.aistnara.ac.jp.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Brodsky, J.L., Goeckeler, J., and Schekman, R. (1995).
BiP and Sec63p are required for both co- and posttranslational protein
translocation into the yeast endoplasmic reticulum. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA 92,
9643-9646.
Brodsky, J.L., and Rose, M.D. (1997). Saccharomyces cerevisiae Kar2p. In: Molecular Chaperones and Protein-Folding Catalysts, ed. M.J. Gething, New York: Oxford University Press, 33-36.
Brodsky, J.L., Werner, E.D., Dubas, M.E., Goeckeler, J.L., Kruse,
K.B., and McCracken, A.A. (1999). The requirement for molecular
chaperones during endoplasmic reticulum-associated protein degradation
demonstrates that protein export and import are mechanistically distinct.
J. Biol. Chem. 274,
3453-3460.
Bukau, B., and Horwich, A.L. (1998). The Hsp70 and Hsp60 chaperone machines. Cell 92, 351-366.[CrossRef][Medline]
Calfon, M., Zeng, H., Urano, F., Till, J.H., Hubbard, S.R., Harding, H.P., Clark, S.G., and Ron, D. (2002). IRE1 couples endoplasmic reticulum load to secretory capacity by processing the XBP-1 mRNA. Nature 415, 92-96.[CrossRef][Medline]
Christianson, T.W., Sikorski, R.S., Dante, M., Shero, J.H., and Hieter, P. (1992). Multifunctional yeast high-copy-number shuttle vectors. Gene 110, 119-122.[CrossRef][Medline]
Collart, M.A., and Oliviero, S. (1993). In: Current Protocols in Molecular Biology, ed. F.M. Ausubel, R. Brent, R.E. Kingston, D.D. Moore, J.G. Seidman, J.A. Smoth, and K. Struhl, New York: Greene Publishing Associates and John Wiley & Sons, 13.12.1-13.12.2.
Cox, J.S., Shamu, C.E., and Walter, P. (1993). Transcriptional induction of genes encoding endoplasmic reticulum resident proteins requires a transmembrane protein kinase. Cell 73, 1197-1206.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cox, J.S., and Walter, P. (1996). A novel mechanism for regulating activity of a transcription factor that controls the unfolded protein response. Cell 87, 391-404.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fukuda, R., Horiuchi, H., Ohta, A., and Takagi, M.
(1994). The prosequence of Rhizopus niveus aspartic proteinase-I
supports correct folding and secretion of its mature part in Saccharomyces
cerevisiae. J. Biol. Chem.
269,
9556-9561.
Hamman, B.D., Hendershot, L.M., and Johnson, A.E. (1998). BiP maintains the permeability barrier of the ER membrane by sealing the lumenal end of the translocon pore before and early in translocation. Cell 92, 747-758.[CrossRef][Medline]
Harding, H.P., Zhang, Y., and Ron, D. (1999). Protein translation and folding are coupled by an endoplasmic-reticulum-resident kinase. Nature 397, 271-274.[CrossRef][Medline]
Horiuchi, H., Ashikari, T., Amachi, T., Yoshizumi, H., Takagi, M., and Yano, K. (1990). High-level secretion of a Rhizopus niveus aspartic proteinase in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Agric. Biol. Chem. 54, 1771-1779.[Medline]
Iwawaki, T., Hosoda, A., Okuda, T., Kamigori, Y., Nomura-Furuwatari, C., Kimata, Y., Tsuru, A., and Kohno, K. (2001). Translational control by the ER transmembrane kinase/ribonuclease IRE1 under ER stress. Nat. Cell Biol. 3, 158-164.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kaiser, C., Michaelis, S., and Mitchell, A. (1994). Methods in Yeast Genetics: A Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Course Manual. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Kohno, K., Normington, K., Sambrook, J., Gething, M.J., and Mori,
K. (1993). The promoter region of the yeast KAR2 (BiP)
gene contains a regulatory domain that responds to the presence of unfolded
proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum. Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
877-890.
Lee, K., Tirasophon, W., Shen, X., Michalak, M., Prywes, R., Okada,
T., Yoshida, H., Mori, K., and Kaufman, R.J. (2002).
IRE1-mediated unconventional mRNA splicing and S2P-mediated ATF6 cleavage
merge to regulate XBP1 in signaling the unfolded protein response.
Genes Dev. 16,
452-466.
Liu, C.Y., Schroder, M., and Kaufman, R.J. (2000).
Ligand-independent dimerization activates the stress response kinases IRE1 and
PERK in the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum. J. Biol. Chem.
275,
24881-24885.
Liu, C.Y., Wong, H.N., Schauerte, J.A., and Kaufman, R.J.
(2002). The Protein kinase/endoribonuclease IRE1alpha that
signals the unfolded protein response has a luminal N-terminal
ligand-independent dimerization domain. J. Biol. Chem.
277,
18346-18356.
Matlack, K.E., Misselwitz, B., Plath, K., and Rapoport, T.A. (1999). BiP acts as a molecular ratchet during posttranslational transport of pre-pro-alpha factor across the ER membrane. Cell 97, 553-564.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mori, K., Ma, W., Gething, M.J., and Sambrook, J. (1993). A transmembrane protein with a cdc2+/CDC28-related kinase activity is required for signaling from the ER to the nucleus. Cell 74, 743-756.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mori, K., Ogawa, N., Kawahara, T., Yanagi, H., and Yura, T.
(2000). mRNA splicing-mediated C-terminal replacement of
transcription factor Hac1p is required for efficient activation of the
unfolded protein response. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
97,
4660-4665.
Mori, K., Sant, A., Kohno, K., Normington, K., Gething, M.J., and Sambrook, J.F. (1992). A 22 bp cis-acting element is necessary and sufficient for the induction of the yeast KAR2 (BiP) gene by unfolded proteins. EMBO J. 11, 2583-2593.[Medline]
Morimoto, R.I. (1997). Transcriptional regulation of eukaryotic heat shock genes. In: Molecular Chaperones and Protein-Folding Catalysts, ed. M.J. Gething, New York: Oxford University Press, 534-541.
Nishikawa, S.I., Fewell, S.W., Kato, Y., Brodsky, J.L., and Endo,
T. (2001). Molecular chaperones in the yeast endoplasmic
reticulum maintain the solubility of proteins for retrotranslocation and
degradation. J. Cell Biol. 153,
1061-1069.
Normington, K., Kohno, K., Kozutsumi, Y., Gething, M.J., and Sambrook, J. (1989). S. cerevisiae encodes an essential protein homologous in sequence and function to mammalian BiP. Cell 57, 1223-1236.[CrossRef][Medline]
Oka, M., Kimata, Y., Mori, K., and Kohno, K. (1997).
Saccharomyces cerevisiae KAR2 (BiP) gene expression is induced by loss of
cytosolic HSP70/Ssa1p through a heat shock element-mediated pathway. J.
Biochem. (Tokyo) 121,
578-584.
Okamura, K., Kimata, Y., Higashio, H., Tsuru, A., and Kohno, K. (2000). Dissociation of Kar2p/BiP from an ER sensory molecule, Ire1p, triggers the unfolded protein response in yeast. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 279, 445-450.[CrossRef][Medline]
Plemper, R.K., Bohmler, S., Bordallo, J., Sommer, T., and Wolf, D.H. (1997). Mutant analysis links the translocon and BiP to retrograde protein transport for ER degradation. Nature 388, 891-895.[CrossRef][Medline]
Polaina, J., and Conde, J. (1982). Genes involved in the control of nuclear fusion during the sexual cycle of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol. Gen. Genet. 186, 253-258.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rose, M.D., Misra, L.M., and Vogel, J.P. (1989). KAR2, a karyogamy gene, is the yeast homolog of the mammalian BiP/GRP78 gene. Cell 57, 1211-1221.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ruegsegger, U., Leber, J.H., and Walter, P. (2001). Block of HAC1 mRNA translation by long-range base pairing is released by cytoplasmic splicing upon induction of the unfolded protein response. Cell 107, 103-114.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sanders, S.L., Whitfield, K.M., Vogel, J.P., Rose, M.D., and Schekman, R.W. (1992). Sec61p and BiP directly facilitate polypeptide translocation into the ER. Cell 69, 353-365.[CrossRef][Medline]
Scidmore, M.A., Okamura, H.H., and Rose, M.D. (1993). Genetic interactions between KAR2 and SEC63, encoding eukaryotic homologues of DnaK and DnaJ in the endoplasmic reticulum. Mol. Biol. Cell 4, 1145-1159.[Abstract]
Shamu, C.E., and Walter, P. (1996). Oligomerization and phosphorylation of the Ire1p kinase during intracellular signaling from the endoplasmic reticulum to the nucleus. EMBO J. 15, 3028-3039.[Medline]
Shen, J., Chen, X., Hendershot, L., and Prywes, R. (2002). ER stress regulation of ATF6 localization by dissociation of BiP/GRP78 binding and unmasking of Golgi localization signals. Dev. Cell 3, 99-111.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shen, X. et al. (2001). Complementary signalling pathways regulate the unfolded protein response and are required for C. elegans development. Cell 107, 893-903.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sidrauski, C., and Walter, P. (1997). The transmembrane kinase Ire1p is a site-specific endonuclease that initiates mRNA splicing in the unfolded protein response. Cell 90, 1031-1039.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sikorski, R.S., and Hieter, P. (1989). A system of
shuttle vectors and yeast host strains designed for efficient manipulation of
DNA in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics
122,
19-27.
Simons, J.F., Ferro-Novick, S., Rose, M.D., and Helenius, A.
(1995). BiP/Kar2p serves as a molecular chaperone during
carboxypeptidase Y folding in yeast. J. Cell Biol.
130,
41-49.
Takatsuki, A., Kohno, K., and Tamura, G. (1975). Inhibition of biosynthesis of polyisoprenol sugars in chick embryo microsomes by tunicamycin. Agric. Biol. Chem. 39, 2089-2091.
te Heesen, S., and Aebi, M. (1994). The genetic interaction of kar2 and wbp1 mutations. Distinct functions of binding protein BiP and N-linked glycosylation in the processing pathway of secreted proteins in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Eur. J. Biochem. 222, 631-637.[Medline]
Tirasophon, W., Welihinda, A.A., and Kaufman, R.J.
(1998). A stress response pathway from the endoplasmic reticulum
to the nucleus requires a novel bifunctional protein kinase/endoribonuclease
(Ire1p) in mammalian cells. Genes Dev.
12,
1812-1824.
Tokunaga, M., Kawamura, A., and Kohno, K. (1992).
Purification and characterization of BiP/Kar2 protein from Saccharomyces
cerevisiae. J. Biol. Chem.
267,
17553-17559.
Umebayashi, K., Hirata, A., Fukuda, R., Horiuchi, H., Ohta, A., and Takagi, M. (1997). Accumulation of misfolded protein aggregates leads to the formation of russell body-like dilated endoplasmic reticulum in yeast. Yeast 13, 1009-1020.[CrossRef][Medline]
Umebayashi, K., Hirata, A., Horiuchi, H., Ohta, A., and Takagi, M. (1999). Unfolded protein response-induced BiP/Kar2p production protects cell growth against accumulation of misfolded protein aggregates in the yeast endoplasmic reticulum. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 78, 726-738.[Medline]
Vogel, J.P., Misra, L.M., and Rose, M.D. (1990). Loss
of BiP/GRP78 function blocks translocation of secretory proteins in yeast.
J. Cell Biol. 110,
1885-1895.
Wang, X.Z., Harding, H.P., Zhang, Y., Jolicoeur, E.M., Kuroda, M., and Ron, D. (1998). Cloning of mammalian Ire1 reveals diversity in the ER stress responses. EMBO J. 17, 5708-5717.[CrossRef][Medline]
Welihinda, A.A., and Kaufman, R.J. (1996). The
unfolded protein response pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Oligomerization and trans-phosphorylation of Ire1p (Ern1p) are required for
kinase activation. J. Biol. Chem.
271,
18181-18187.
Yoshida, H., Matsui, T., Yamamoto, A., Okada, T., and Mori, K. (2001). XBP1 mRNA is induced by ATF6 and spliced by IRE1 in response to ER stress to produce a highly active transcription factor. Cell 107, 881-891.