|
|
|
|
Vol. 18, Issue 1, 229-241, January 2007
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||



*Neurobiologie des Interactions Cellulaires et Neurophysiopathologie, CNRS UMR 6184, Université de la Méditerranée, Institut Jean-Roche, 13916 Marseille Cedex 20, France;
INSERM and Université Pierre et Marie Curie (UPMC-Paris 6), Institut du Fer à Moulin, Paris F-75005, France; and
Equipe de Dynamique des Assemblages Membranaires, CNRS UMR 7565, Université Henri Poincaré, F-54506 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France
Submitted June 30, 2006;
Revised October 2, 2006;
Accepted October 30, 2006
Monitoring Editor: Jeffrey Brodsky
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Caspr2, which exhibits a 42% sequence identity with paranodin, is enriched at juxta-paranodes in association with a cell adhesion molecule of the Ig superfamily (IgCAM) closely related to contactin, TAG-1, and both molecules are required for the clustering of potassium channels at juxta-paranodes (Poliak et al., 2003
; Traka et al., 2003
). The strikingly distinct location of highly related paranodin/contactin and caspr2/TAG-1 complexes indicates the existence of very efficient mechanisms of segregation along the axonal membrane. One possibility is that these cell adhesion molecules are uniformly targeted to the axonal membrane and become clustered at their respective final location through axo-glial interactions and cytoskeletal linkers. Alternatively, preformed complexes of paranodal or juxta-paranodal components may be sorted to their specific subdomains.
The cell surface delivery of paranodin and contactin is a tightly controlled process. Paranodin and contactin are interdependent for their distribution at the paranodes, because the knockout mutation of contactin in mice prevents intracellular transport and surface expression of paranodin, which becomes confined to neuronal cell bodies (Boyle et al., 2001
). In the absence of contactin, paranodin is blocked in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER; Faivre-Sarrailh et al., 2000
). Association with the GPI-anchored contactin releases paranodin from the lectin-chaperone calnexin, allowing the complex to exit from the ER (Bonnon et al., 2003
). The ER quality control checkpoints provide a stringent process to eliminate misfolded proteins and prevent premature export of unassembled subunits (Ellgaard and Helenius, 2003
). Proteins are subjected to a primary quality control based on the recognition of conformational features such as exposure of hydrophobic regions, unpaired cysteine residues, or the tendency to aggregate. More specific mechanisms control ER retention or retrieval from the Golgi and ER exit of particular classes of proteins. Cytoplasmic retention signals such as dibasic motifs are masked by correct oligomeric assembly to determine the surface expression of functional receptors and ion channels (Zerangue et al., 1999
; Bichet et al., 2000
; Standley et al., 2000
).
Here, using a combination of deletions and domain swapping between paranodin and caspr2, we identify the extracellular region of paranodin responsible for its ER retention. This region was termed PGY because it includes a 10-fold imperfect repetition of Pro-Gly-Tyr. Our study indicates that PGY acts as a conformation-based retention signal that compels chaperoning by contactin and the calnexin/calreticulin cycle before export of the paranodal glycoprotein complex. Importantly, contactin associated with paranodin is processed with ER-type high mannose N-glycans, generating a glycoform that selectively binds NF155.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Cloning Strategies
The DNA construct pRc-CMV/F3 encoding the full-length sequence of F3/contactin (Durbec et al., 1994
) and pBK-CMV-pnd encoding the full-length sequence of paranodin (Menegoz et al., 1997
) were described previously. The DNA coding for the HA-tagged Arf1(Q71L) inserted into pSR2 was a gift from Dr. P. Chavrier (Prigent et al., 2003
). The full-length sequence of caspr2 was inserted at SalI/NotI sites into pBlueScriptII SK and subcloned in pCDNA3 at the KpnI/NotI sites (Bonnon et al., 2003
). The caspr2N-pnd chimera was generated by PCR amplification with the Pfu polymerase (Roche) of the discoidin and first laminin G (LNG-1) domains of caspr2 (aa 1275) inserted into the SnaBI sites of pBK-CMV-pnd. The pnd-caspr2C chimera was generated by PCR amplification of the LNG-4, transmembrane, and intracellular domains of caspr2 (aa 10291331) inserted into the PmlI/XbaI sites of pBK-CMV-pnd. The pnd
PGY1 construct was obtained by PCR amplification of the LNG-2 and EGF-2 domains of paranodin (aa 7831030) inserted at the BstEII site into pBK-CMV-pnd
4, previously described in Bonnon et al. (2003)
. The pnd
PGY2 construct was generated by PCR amplification of the LNG-4 and intracellular domains of paranodin (aa 10821381) inserted into the PmlI/XbaI sites of the pnd-caspr2C chimera. The pnd
9851030 construct was generated by PCR amplification of the PGY, LNG-4, and intracellular domains of paranodin (aa 10311381) inserted into the PmlI/XbaI sites of pBK-CMV-pnd. The caspr2-PGY construct was generated by PCR amplification of part of the EGF-2 and the PGY repeats domains of paranodin (aa 992-1116) inserted into the PmlI site of pBS/caspr2 and subcloned into the EcoNI-NotI sites of pCDNA3/caspr2. The NrCAM-PGY construct was generated by PCR amplification of the PGY repeats domains of paranodin (aa 10141083) fused to the fourth FNIII-C-terminal region of NrCAM (aa 9441215) inserted at XhoI/BamHI sites of the NrCAM
Fn
cyt construct (Falk et al., 2004
). The contactin-GFP construct was obtained by subcloning the HindIII/EcoRI sequence from pRc-CMV/F3 in pEGFP-N2 (Clontech, Mountain View, CA), resulting in the in frame fusion of GFP at the C-terminus of the complete coding sequence of contactin (aa 11020). The PCR-amplified products were verified by sequencing (Genome Express, Meylan, France).
Cell Culture
COS-7, CHO, and neuroblastoma N2a cells grown in DMEM containing 10% FCS were transiently transfected using jet PEI (Polyplus transfection, Illkirsch, France). Transfected N2a cells were cultured for 24 h in OptiMEM (Invitrogen, Cergy Pontoise, France) before treatments with 2 µg/ml tunicamycin (Sigma) or 1 mM castanospermine (Sigma) during an additional period of 18 h. The parental (pro5) and N-glycosylation mutant CHO cell lines (Lec1, Lec10, and Lec23; Stanley and Ioffe, 1995
) were kindly provided by Dr. E. Fenouillet (Institut Jean Roche, Marseille, France). The NF155-Fc (Charles et al., 2002
) and NrCAM-Fc (Faivre-Sarrailh et al., 1999
) were produced in the supernatant of transfected COS-7 cells and used as previously described for binding or ligand-affinity purification experiments. Immunoprecipitation, endoglycosidase treatments, cell surface biotinylation were performed as previously described (Bonnon et al., 2003
).
Immunofluorescence and Confocal Microscopy
N2a cells plated on glass coverslips were transfected with the different constructs. The distribution of caspr2, paranodin, caspr2N-pnd, pnd-caspr2C, pnd
PGY1, pnd
PGY2, pnd
9851030, and caspr2-PGY was analyzed on N2a-transfected cells using anti-paranodin or anti-caspr2 antibodies. For double-staining with anti-BiP or anti-HA mAb, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS for 10 min, permeabilized with 0.1% Triton X-100 (TX-100) for 10 min. For double-staining with anti-58K mAb, cells were fixed with methanol for 10 min at 20°C. Immunofluorescence staining was performed using SL51 (1:2000), anti-caspr2 (1:2000), anti-BiP (1:200), anti-HA (1:100), or anti-58K (1:100) antibodies diluted in PBS containing 3% bovine serum albumin (BSA). The cells were rinsed with PBS and incubated with secondary antibodies diluted in PBS containing 3% BSA for 30 min. After washing in PBS, cells were mounted in Mowiol (Calbochiem, La Jolla, CA).
Confocal image acquisition was performed on a Leica (Wetzlar, Germany) TCS SP2 laser scanning microscope equipped with 63x/1.32 na oil immersion objective. Images of GFP or Alexa-488, -568, and -647conjugated antibodies stained cells were obtained using, respectively, the 488-nm band of an Argon laser and the 543- and 633-nm bands of an He-Ne laser for excitation. Spectral detection and emitted fluorescence was set as follows: 500535 nm for Alexa-488 or GFP, 550620 nm for Alexa-568 and 650750 nm for Alexa-647. Fluorescence images were collected automatically as frame-by-frame sequential series, each image being produced from an average of six frame scans. Pixel size was set to 163 nm by adjusting the electronic zoom at 2.8x. Three-dimensional (3D) stacks of confocal images were acquired using a 1-µm step, and representative images were selected.
For the quantitative analysis of NF155-Fc binding, fluorescence images were collected in randomly selected area with identical parameters of acquisition using a Nikon (Champigny sur Marne, France) E800 microscope equipped with epifluorescence and an Hamamatsu Photonics (Massy, France) ORCA-ER camera. The mean of fluorescence was measured on individual cells using the LUCIA (Nikon) image analysis software.
NMR Spectroscopy of the PGY-rich Sequence
A peptide of 22-mer corresponding to half of sequence of the PGY repeats (aa 10341055, PGYEPGYIPGYDTPGYVPGYHG) was purchased from EZBiolab (Westfield, IN). 2D-NMR spectra of this PGY repeat peptide (2 mM in 500 µl of H2O/D2O, 90/10, vol/vol) were recorded on a Bruker DRX500 spectrometer (Rheinstetten, Germany) equipped with an HCN probe and self-shielded triple axis gradients. A TOCSY (clean total correlation spectroscopy) with a spin-lock time of 80 ms and a spin-locking field strength of 8 kHz, a NOESY (nuclear Overhauser effect spectroscopy) with a mixing time of 150 ms and a ROESY (rotational nuclear Overhauser effect spectroscopy) with a mixing time of 80 ms were acquired. Water suppression was obtained with a watergate 3-9-19 pulse train using a gradient at the magic angle obtained by applying simultaneous x-, y-, and z-gradients before detection.
Online Supplementary Material
Supplementary Table S1 shows the quantitative analysis of the kinetics of cell membrane expression of paranodin/caspr2 chimeras and mutant forms after transfection in N2a cells. Supplementary Figure S1 shows that the transmembrane domain of paranodin is not implicated in ER retention. Supplementary Figure S2 shows that contactin-GFP interacted with paranodin and induced its expression at the cell membrane. The structure prediction of the PGY region is shown in Supplementary Figure S3.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
50-residue region with 10 imperfect repeats of the triplet Pro-Gly-Tyr followed by one or two other residues, here termed PGY. This region is absent in caspr2 (Figure 3A). To test for the possible role of PGY in ER retention, we investigated the consequences of PGY deletion in paranodin. Pnd
PGY1 deleted of residues 10311097 (Figures 1A and 3A) was colocalized with the ER marker BiP and was not detected at the cell membrane in transfected N2a cells (Figure 3, B and C). We generated pnd
PGY2, a mutant with a larger deletion (lacking residues 9851081), corresponding to that in pnd-caspr2C (Figure 1A), including part of the EGF-2 domain and the sequence upstream of PGY (Figure 3A). Pnd
PGY2 was strongly expressed at the cell membrane in a low percentage of transfected cells (21%, n = 245) 48 h after transfection (Figure 3, D and E). We generated pnd
9851030 to evaluate the possible role of the sequence upstream of PGY, which is deleted in the pnd
PGY2 construct (Figure 1A). Pnd
9851030 was distributed in the ER and was never detected at the cell membrane (Figure 3, F and G). Altogether these results demonstrate that ER retention of paranodin requires an extracellular signal that includes the PGY region.
|
The role of PGY as an ER retention signal was also analyzed using a cell surface biotinylation assay in N2a cells transfected with paranodin, caspr2, or mutant constructs (Figure 4). Consistent with its intracellular localization, paranodin was slightly biotinylated (Figure 4, lane 1). Similarly, pnd
PGY1 and pnd
9851030, which were only detected in the ER, were slightly biotinylated (lanes 2 and 3). In contrast, biotinylated pnd-caspr2C chimera (lane 7) and pnd
PGY2 (lane 4) were detected at high levels in the immune precipitate, indicating that deletion of PGY allowed cell surface expression of the mutant protein. Caspr2, which is expressed at the cell surface, was highly biotinylated (Figure 4, lane 5), whereas only a low amount of biotinylated caspr2-PGY could be detected (Figure 4, lane 6). Thus, these biochemical data confirm the crucial role of PGY in the retention of paranodin in the ER.
|
PGY2 and pnd-caspr2C, which both lacked PGY, were delivered to the plasma membrane in the presence of castanospermine (Figure 5, H and K): pnd
PGY2 was expressed at the cell membrane of 26% of the cells (n = 115) in the absence of castanospermine and of 25% of the cells (n = 114) in its presence; pnd-caspr2C was expressed at the cell membrane of 67% of the cells (n = 106) in the absence of castanospermine and of 63% of the cells (n = 124), in its presence. Thus deletion of PGY allowed to bypass the quality control by calnexin and calreticulin.
|
PGY2 (lane 4). Calnexin did not interact with caspr2 (lane 6) and interacted weakly with pnd-caspr2C (lane 8). These data indicate that the PGY repeats in paranodin do not directly mediate calnexin binding but may be a conformational signal, inducing ER retention of paranodin at the quality control checkpoint mediated by the calnexin/calreticulin cycle. When inserted ectopically in caspr2 or NrCAM, the PGY repeats induced ER retention in most of the cells (Figure 3, H and K). Castanospermine treatment further increased ER retention of caspr2-PGY, which was expressed at the cell surface of 11% of the cells (n = 123) in the presence of castanospermine compared with 42% of the cells (n = 92) under control conditions. Thus, insertion of PGY in caspr2 induced for a part chaperoning through the calnexin/calreticulin cycle. However, calnexin was not detected in the immune precipitate of caspr2-PGY (Figure 5M, lane 10), likely because the interaction between caspr2-PGY and the lectin chaperone may be transient. In contrast, the cell surface delivery NrCAM-PGY was not modified by castanospermine treatment (not shown). Therefore, PGY by itself does not determine the selective association with calnexin/calreticulin lectin chaperones, which may depend on the adjacent regions conserved in other paranodin family members.
Because proline-rich sequences are known to participate in multiple proteinprotein interactions (Williamson, 1994
), we examined by immunoprecipitation whether the PGY region was involved in contactin binding. Both pnd
PGY2 and pnd-caspr2C, which lack PGY, associated with the 135-kDa form of contactin (Figure 6A, lanes 3 and 5), indicating that PGY was not required for the association of paranodin with contactin. However, coexpression of contactin with pnd
PGY2 or pnd-caspr2C did not modify the cell surface expression of the mutated proteins in the absence or presence of castanospermine (not shown).
|
-sheetbased globular structure, which was stable when studied by molecular dynamics (Supplementary Figure S3; see also Figure 9A). This structure was even more stable when the linker between the PGY-rich region and the EGF-2 domain was included in the model, as well as the adjacent EGF-2 and LNG-4 domains. It should be noted that that the short PGY peptide (aa 10341055), which lacked structural organization identifiable by NMR, adopted coil conformations, escaping rapidly from its starting
-sheets. These results suggest that the PGY region has the capacity to adopt a stable globular structure.
N-Glycosylation Controls the Cell Membrane Delivery of Paranodin
N-glycosylation of membrane proteins is implicated in a series of events along the exocytosis pathway, including regulation of folding and trafficking (Helenius and Aebi, 2004
). Paranodin and caspr2 contain several putative sites of N-glycosylation, only two of which are conserved between the two molecules (Figure 1B). Cell surface delivery of paranodin depend on N-glycans, because tunicamycin, a specific inhibitor of N-glycosylation, induces ER retention of paranodin (Bonnon et al., 2003
). We examined whether this requirement for N-glycosylation was related to the presence of the PGY motif. Tunicamycin treatment blocked paranodin in the ER of N2a cells cotransfected with contactin (Figure 5C). In contrast, caspr2 was readily targeted to the cell membrane after tunicamycin treatment (Figure 5F). Tunicamycin completely prevented the cell membrane expression of pnd
PGY2 (Figure 5I) and pnd-caspr2C (Figure 5L) and induced their ER retention in 100% (n = 133) and 91% (n = 130) of transfected cells, respectively. These results show that N-glycosylation is required for the cell surface transport of paranodin, even in the absence of PGY.
The paranodincontactin complex expressed at the cell surface contains mannose-rich ER-type N-glycans that are sensitive to endoglycosidase H (Endo H; Bonnon et al., 2003
). We examined the sensitivity of the various chimeras to Endo H, as compared with peptide N-Glycosidase F (PNGase F) that deglycosylates both ER and Golgi-type glycoproteins. Both PNGase F and Endo H deglycosylated paranodin, shifting its apparent molecular weight from 180 to 170 kDa (Figure 6B, lanes 2 and 3), whereas caspr2 was Endo Hresistant (Figure 6B, lane 6). Caspr2-PGY was sensitive to Endo H (Figure 6B, lane 9), in agreement with its retention in the ER. The pnd-caspr2C chimera, which was delivered to the cell surface, was resolved in two bands, a 170-kDa Endo Hsensitive and a 180-kDa Endo Hresistant bands (Figure 6B, lane 12), an indication that it was partly processed through the Golgi apparatus.
COPI-mediated Processing of Paranodin Associated with Contactin
We previously showed that paranodin expression at the cell membrane was insensitive to brefeldin A (Bonnon et al., 2003
), a drug that inhibits COPI-mediated transport by interfering with Arf1 GTPase (Lippincott-Schwartz et al., 1989
). This result suggested an unconventional routing of paranodin bypassing the Golgi apparatus. We further explored the possibility of a COPI-mediated transport of paranodin using cotransfection with the dominant negative Arf1-GTP(Q71L) (Prigent et al., 2003
). COPI regulates anterograde transport from the ER to the Golgi stack, transport within the Golgi stack, and retrograde transport of recycling components from pre-Golgi and Golgi membranes to the ER (Rabouille and Klumperman, 2005
). The dominant negative Arf1(Q71L) is locked in the GTP-bound form that blocks COPI coat disassembly. Arf1(Q71L) strongly inhibited the cell membrane expression of paranodin cotransfected with contactin, which accumulated into Golgi structures 14 h after transfection (Figure 7, A and G). It must be noted that the ER-resident chaperone BiP, which contains a KDEL motif of retrieval from the Golgi to the ER, also accumulated in the Golgi apparatus of cells expressing Arf1(Q71L) (Figure 7B). Thus, the complex of paranodin and contactin may recycle through COPI vesicles from the Golgi to the ER, possibly in association with chaperones. In contrast, paranodin cotransfected with Arf1(Q71L) was not recruited into the Golgi in the absence of contactin, indicating that the ER retention of paranodin expressed alone did not depend on retrieval from the Golgi (Figure 7C).
|
All the recombinant proteins were detected in the ER 4 h after transfection, whereas they were delivered to the cell membrane with different kinetics. Caspr2 and contactin-GFP were detected at the cell membrane 6 h after transfection, whereas paranodin cotransfected with contactin and pnd-caspr2C reached the cell membrane only 12 h after transfection (Supplementary Table S1). Thus, paranodin and pnd-caspr2C appeared to require a long-lasting processing (68 h) before their delivery to the cell membrane compared with caspr2. Strikingly, the pnd
PGY2 mutant required an even much longer delay for maturation in the ER because it was only detected at the plasma membrane 28 h after transfection (Supplementary Table S1).
To further analyze the trafficking of paranodin and contactin to the cell membrane, we used temperature blockade at 25°C that prevents exit from the trans-Golgi network and induces accumulation of secreted proteins in the Golgi apparatus (Matlin and Simons, 1983
). Temperature blocks were applied for a period of 4 h just before the onset of surface delivery of transfected proteins. Caspr2 (not shown) or contactin-GFP strongly accumulated in the Golgi when cells were incubated during 4 h at 25°C, as shown by its colocalization with the Golgi marker 58K (Figure 7D). In contrast, we never observed any colocalization of paranodin with 58K in cells cotransfected with contactin-GFP and incubated at 25°C for a period of 4 or 8 h (Figure 7E). Quantification of the data showed that the temperature shift inhibited for a part the cell membrane expression of paranodin (Figure 7H). Interestingly, contactin-GFP associated with paranodin (i.e., in cells coexpressing both proteins) did not accumulate in the Golgi after incubation at 25°C (Figure 7E, asterisks), whereas it colocalized with 58K in the cells expressing contactin-GFP alone (Figure 7E, arrowheads). Thus, paranodin appeared to prevent the default exocytic pathway contactin-GFP. In contrast with paranodin, the pnd-caspr2C chimera was colocalized with the 58K Golgi marker after incubation at 25°C in some of the cells (Figure 7F, arrowheads). This result is in agreement with the existence of an Endo Hresistant pool of pnd-caspr2C (Figure 6B), indicating that the chimera lacking PGY traffics to the cell surface via the classical Golgi pathway. Altogether these results indicate that paranodin trafficking is unusually long and diverges from that of standard Golgi-processed proteins.
Contactin with High-Mannose N-Glycans Strongly Associates with NF155
Association with paranodin allows the cell surface expression of a low Mr form of contactin with high-mannose ER-type N-glycans (Rios et al., 2000
; Bonnon et al., 2003
; Gollan et al., 2003
). As previously shown using cell surface biotinylation assay, both paranodin and contactin are endo-Hsensitive when expressed in complex at the cell surface (Bonnon et al., 2003
). It is still unclear if and how this glycoform of contactin binds NF155, which is expressed by the glial paranodal loops (Tait et al., 2000
). An NF155-Fc chimera specifically binds CHO cells coexpressing contactin and paranodin and precipitates these proteins from brain lysates (Charles et al., 2002
). On the other hand, it has been reported that the coexpression of paranodin with contactin in COS-7 cells prevented NF155-Fc binding to contactin, and NF155-Fc was associated in cis with the high Mr form of contactin in HEK-293 cells (Gollan et al., 2003
). Because these contradictory results suggest a role of paranodin-controlled glycosylation of contactin, we first examined whether the binding of NF155 on contactin may depend on its N-glycan residues.
Tunicamycin treatment did not modify the cell surface expression of contactin in transfected N2a cells (Bonnon et al., 2003
), whereas it completely prevented binding of NF155-Fc (20 µg/ml) (Figure 8, A and B). Binding of NrCAM-Fc, another ligand of contactin, was unaffected (Figure 8, C and D). We then used mutant CHO lines affected in the processing of N-linked carbohydrates (Stanley and Ioffe, 1995
) to test whether NF155 may interact with contactin bearing either high-mannose residues or complex oligosaccharide chains. The Lec1 line mutated for the N-acetylglucosamine transferase I produces N-glycans with the high-mannose configuration Man5GlcNAc2, the Lec23 line is mutated for the
-glucosidase I preventing trimming of Glc3Man79GlcNAc2 N-glycans and the Lec10 line overexpressing the N-acetylglucosamine transferase III produces bisected complex N-glycans (Figure 8F). Western blot analyses indicated that each glycosylation mutant produced different forms of contactin, indicating an altered carbohydrate content (Figure 8G). Cell surface expression of contactin was comparable in transfected parental and mutant CHO cells as estimated by live cells immunostaining with anti-contactin antibody 24 (Figure 8H). Contactin with complex N-glycans when expressed by the parental or Lec10 CHO lines faintly bound NF155-Fc (10 µg/ml; Figure 8, I and J). In contrast, both the Lec1 and Lec23 cell lines expressing contactin bearing high-mannose glycans strongly bound NF155-Fc (Figure 8, I and J). Cotransfection of paranodin with contactin in the Lec1 and Lec23 lines did not prevent the strong NF155 binding (not shown). Parental CHO cells coexpressing contactin and paranodin at their cell surface with high-mannose glycans strongly bound NF155-Fc (Figure 8, I and J). Quantitative analyses indicated that binding of NF155 was significantly increased on cells with high-mannose contactin when compared with parental CHO cells expressing complex N-glycan contactin (Figure 8J). In addition, both paranodin and contactin from CHO cell lysate were affinity-purified using NF155-Fc protein A-Sepharose. Paranodin and contactin in complex with NF155-Fc displayed Endo H-sensitivity (Figure 8K). Finally, NF155-Fc binding sites were colocalized with paranodin in N2a cells cotransfected with contactin and paranodin (Figure 8E). Altogether, these results show that the paranodin-controlled glycosylation of contactin induces strong binding of neurofascin-155 and allows the three adhesion glycoproteins to form a tripartite complex.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The ER Retention Motif of Paranodin Resides in Its Ectodomain
ER retention is a widely used mechanism that prevents the cell surface delivery of unassembled subunits of membrane channels or receptors. Many ER retention signals are cytoplasmic motifs such as the dibasic KKXX or arginine-based RXR motifs, whereas luminal retention motifs have not been identified, with the exception of the well-characterized KDEL signal that retains soluble resident proteins in the ER (Ellgaard and Helenius, 2003
). Here, we found that the ER retention motif of paranodin has an extracellular location between the EGF-2 and the Laminin G (LNG)-4 domains. It consists of a proline-rich sequence of
50 residues with 10 imperfect repeats of the PGY(X)12 motif where X is any amino acid. Motifs with PGY repeats of unknown function are encountered in a variety of prokaryotic and eukaryotic proteins, among which some are secreted. The PGY motif is not found in the other members of the neurexin IV/caspr/paranodin family, including caspr2, caspr3 and caspr4 (Spiegel et al., 2002
). In addition, neurexin IV, the only Drosophila ortholog of these proteins, does not contain PGY and does not display any ER retention (Faivre-Sarrailh et al., 2004
). Thus, the PGY motif appears to be a specific characteristic of paranodin that accounts for its unusual trafficking and exclusive cellular localization.
The PGY Motif May Impose a Conformational Processing of Paranodin before Export
Proline-rich sequences with repeated motifs often correspond to extended protein regions which are in an unfolded state and undergo multiple protein-protein interactions (Williamson, 1994
; Rath et al., 2005
). Interestingly, structural prediction studies suggest that the PGY region may adopt a stable organized
-sheet structure. Because contactin does not interact directly with PGY, an attractive hypothesis would be that contactin might act as a chaperone and induce a disorder-to-order transition of the PGY-rich sequence, allowing its transport to the cell surface (Figure 9A).
|
PGY2 and pnd-caspr2C allows the mutant proteins to be expressed at the cell surface bypassing the calnexin/calreticulin cycle. Conversely, PGY inserted into caspr2 induces ER retention and chaperoning for a part by calnexin/calreticulin. Association with contactin powerfully induces the cell surface expression of paranodin, whereas it does not improve cell surface delivery of pnd
PGY2 and pnd-caspr2C. Therefore, we can propose that PGY may be required to generate the fully stable conformation of paranodin through the chaperoning by contactin and calnexin/calreticulin cycle. Interestingly, even in the absence of PGY, the cell surface delivery of pnd
PGY2 or pnd-caspr2C required a long-lasting processing in the ER and was prevented in presence of tunicamycin. This result underscores the crucial role of N-glycans in generating a permissive conformation for the cell surface trafficking of paranodin.
Long-lasting Processing of Paranodin before Export to the Cell Surface
We have previously reported that the complex of paranodin and contactin is expressed at the plasma membrane with ER-type Endo Hsensitive carbohydrates and may traffic to the cell surface through an unconventional pathway that bypass the Golgi apparatus (Bonnon et al., 2003
). Recent studies indicate that few transmembrane proteins may traffic to the plasma membrane via a Golgi-independent pathway, including the protein phosphatase CD45 (Baldwin and Ostergaard, 2002
) and the epithelial sodium channel (Hughey et al., 2004
). The precise nature of this pathway remains to be elucidated. In the present study, we have reevaluated the possibility of a Golgi-independent pathway for paranodal proteins using the dominant negative mutant of Arf1, Arf1(Q71L), and temperature blockade of export. The cell surface expression of paranodin associated with contactin was prevented by Arf1(Q71L) revealing its dependence on COPI vesicles. However, the role of COPI vesicles is complex since it is implicated in both anterograde and retrograde transport from Golgi to the ER (Rabouille and Klumperman, 2005
). On the other hand, temperature blockade of paranodin export did not induce any accumulation of the protein in the Golgi. This unconventional ER processing of paranodin associated with contactin takes a long time (over 8 h) and may require recycling from the Golgi to the ER before exit of the complex to the cell surface.
Processing of Paranodin and Contactin with High-Mannose N-Glycans May Induce Their Selective Association with Glial NF155 at Paranodes
The unconventional processing of paranodin and contactin leads to the expression of these glycoproteins with mannose-rich N-glycans at paranodes. By contrast, the contactin isoform expressed at the node may bear complex N-glycans (Rios et al., 2000
). NF155, which is selectively expressed by the paranodal glial loops is required for the restricted positioning of contactin and paranodin along the myelinated axons at paranodes (Sherman et al., 2005
). Neurofascin and contactin, as the other members of the IgCAM family, show a broad activity of binding. Therefore, the selective association of these IgCAMs at paranodes may require a fine tuning. The generation of specific splice variants, such as the NF155 isoform expressed at paranodes, provides a way to regulate the binding activities of neurofascin (Volkmer et al., 1998
). On the other hand, we show here a crucial role of paranodin in controlling the differential maturation of N-linked carbohydrates of contactin, which in turn regulates its association with NF155. The use of N-glycosylation mutant cell lines provides the direct demonstration that NF155 strongly binds the low Mr form of contactin bearing high-mannose N-glycans. These data challenge a previous study of Gollan et al. (2003)
indicating that NF155 may only bind the high Mr form of contactin. NF155 may directly bind the oligosaccharide chains of contactin. Alternatively, the presence of high-mannose N-glycans on contactin may support an optimal conformation of the polypeptide for the binding of NF155.
Thus, this study reveals the structural basis for the processing differences between caspr2 and paranodin, two proteins, which in spite of a high degree of sequence homology, have distinct localization and functions. The PGY motif, specific to paranodin, forces this protein to follow a specific maturation pathway, which can be completed only in the presence of contactin. Reciprocally, contactin associated with paranodin is processed with mannose-rich N-glycans to the cell surface. This may be a critical mechanism for the binding of the glial partner NF155 at the paranodal junctions, for the generation of specialized subdomains at nodes of Ranvier and thus for the positioning of voltage-gated ion channels that are essential for an effective nerve conduction.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
This article was published online ahead of print in MBC in Press (http://www.molbiolcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1091/mbc.E06-06-0570) on November 8, 2006.
Address correspondence to: Catherine Faivre-Sarrailh (sarrailh.c{at}jean-roche.univ-mrs.fr)
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Bhat, M. A., et al. (2001). Axon-glia interactions and the domain organization of myelinated axons requires neurexin IV/Caspr/Paranodin. Neuron 30, 369383.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bichet, D., Cornet, V., Geib, S., Carlier, E., Volsen, S., Hoshi, T., Mori, Y., De Waard, M. (2000). The I-II loop of the Ca2+ channel alpha1 subunit contains an endoplasmic reticulum retention signal antagonized by the beta subunit. Neuron 25, 177190.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bonnon, C., Goutebroze, L., Denisenko-Nehrbass, N., Girault, J. A., Faivre-Sarrailh, C. (2003). The paranodal complex of F3/contactin and caspr/paranodin traffics to the cell surface via a non-conventional pathway. J. Biol. Chem 278, 4833948347.
Boyle, M. E., Berglund, E. O., Murai, K. K., Weber, L., Peles, E., Ranscht, B. (2001). Contactin orchestrates assembly of the septate-like junctions at the paranode in myelinated peripheral nerve. Neuron 30, 385397.[CrossRef][Medline]
Charles, P., Tait, S., Faivre-Sarrailh, C., Barbin, G., Gunn-Moore, F., Denisenko-Nehrbass, N., Guennoc, A. M., Girault, J. A., Brophy, P. J., Lubetzki, C. (2002). Neurofascin is a glial receptor for the paranodin/Caspr-contactin axonal complex at the axoglial junction. Curr. Biol 12, 217220.[CrossRef][Medline]
Durbec, P., Gennarini, G., Buttiglione, M., Gomez, S., Rougon, G. (1994). Different domains of the F3 neuronal adhesion molecule are involved in adhesion and neurite outgrowth promotion. Eur. J. Neurosci 6, 461472.[CrossRef][Medline]
Einheber, S., Zanazzi, G., Ching, W., Scherer, S., Milner, T. A., Peles, E., Salzer, J. L. (1997). The axonal membrane protein Caspr, a homologue of neurexin IV, is a component of the septate-like paranodal junctions that assemble during myelination. J. Cell Biol 139, 14951506.
Ellgaard, L. and Helenius, A. (2003). Quality control in the endoplasmic reticulum. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol 4, 181191.[CrossRef][Medline]
Faivre-Sarrailh, C., Falk, J., Pollerberg, E., Schachner, M., Rougon, G. (1999). NrCAM, cerebellar granule cell receptor for the neuronal adhesion molecule F3, displays an actin-dependent mobility in growth cones. J. Cell Sci 112, 30153027.[Abstract]
Faivre-Sarrailh, C., Gauthier, F., Denisenko-Nehrbass, N., Le Bivic, A., Rougon, G., Girault, J. A. (2000). The glycosylphosphatidyl inositol-anchored adhesion molecule F3/contactin is required for surface transport of paranodin/contactin-associated protein (caspr). J. Cell Biol 149, 491502.
Faivre-Sarrailh, C., Banerjee, S., Li, J., Hortsch, M., Laval, M., Bhat, M. A. (2004). Drosophila contactin, a homolog of vertebrate contactin, is required for septate junction organization and paracellular barrier function. Development 131, 49314942.
Falk, J., Thoumine, O., Dequidt, C., Choquet, D., Faivre-Sarrailh, C. (2004). NrCAM coupling to the cytoskeleton depends on multiple protein domains and partitioning into lipid rafts. Mol. Biol. Cell 15, 46954709.
Girault, J. A. and Peles, E. (2002). Development of nodes of Ranvier. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol 12, 476485.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gollan, L., Salomon, D., Salzer, J. L., Peles, E. (2003). Caspr regulates the processing of contactin and inhibits its binding to neurofascin. J. Cell Biol 163, 12131218.
Helenius, A. and Aebi, M. (2004). Roles of N-linked glycans in the endoplasmic reticulum. Annu. Rev. Biochem 73, 10191049.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hughey, R. P., Bruns, J. B., Kinlough, C. L., Kleyman, T. R. (2004). Distinct pools of epithelial sodium channels are expressed at the plasma membrane. J. Biol. Chem 279, 4849148494.
Lippincott-Schwartz, J., Yuan, L. C., Bonifacino, J. S., Klausner, R. D. (1989). Rapid redistribution of Golgi proteins into the ER in cells treated with brefeldin A: evidence for membrane cycling from Golgi to ER. Cell 56, 801813.[CrossRef][Medline]
Matlin, K. S. and Simons, K. (1983). Reduced temperature prevents transfer of a membrane glycoprotein to the cell surface but does not prevent terminal glycosylation. Cell 34, 233243.[CrossRef][Medline]
Menegoz, M., Gaspar, P., Le Bert, M., Galvez, T., Burgaya, F., Palfrey, C., Ezan, P., Arnos, F., Girault, J. A. (1997). Paranodin, a glycoprotein of neuronal paranodal membranes. Neuron 19, 319331.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ou, W. J., Cameron, P. H., Thomas, D. Y., Bergeron, J. J. (1993). Association of folding intermediates of glycoproteins with calnexin during protein maturation. Nature 364, 771776.[CrossRef]