![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
Vol. 18, Issue 5, 1816-1825, May 2007
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
*Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306; and Medical Research Council Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge CB2 2QH, United Kingdom
Submitted August 24, 2006;
Revised January 29, 2007;
Accepted February 26, 2007
Monitoring Editor: Yu-li Wang
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
; Rafelski and Theriot, 2004). There is now general agreement that localized assembly of actin filaments drives leading edge protrusion (reviewed in Pollard and Borisy, 2003). Many of the components of the protrusion machinery have been identified and in a closely related motile system, the actin comet tails that propel intracellular pathogens such as Listeria, movement has been reconstituted from purified proteins (Loisel et al., 1999). However, the mechanism by which filament assembly pushes the leading edge membrane of a crawling cell forward is still under debate (Mogilner, 2006).
Sperm from nematodes such as Ascaris offer distinct advantages for investigating the mechanism of protrusion. These remarkably simple cells exhibit the same pattern of movement as other crawling cells although their locomotion is based on a system of filaments comprised of major sperm protein (MSP) in place of the more typical actin cytoskeleton (Sepsenwol et al., 1989; reviewed in Roberts and Stewart, 2000; Stewart and Roberts, 2005). The MSP motility apparatus is dedicated to locomotion and its simplicity is illustrated by the ease with which leading edge protrusion can be reconstituted in vitro. Addition of ATP to cell-free extracts of sperm triggers the assembly of a column of MSP filaments, called a fiber, behind vesicles derived from the plasma membrane at the leading edge of the sperm lamellipod (Italiano et al., 1996). As the fiber grows it pushes the vesicle forward in the same way that localized assembly of the MSP cytoskeleton powers protrusion of the leading edge in intact sperm (reviewed in Roberts and Stewart, 2000; Italiano et al., 2001).
Analysis of the MSP in vitro motility system has generated important insights into the mechanism of amoeboid locomotion that also apply to actin-based cells (Roberts and Stewart, 2000; Miao et al., 2003). To exploit fully the advantages of this simple experimental system and its faithful reconstitution of leading edge protrusion requires identification of the complete set of proteins that comprise the motility apparatus. Previous work identified two sperm proteins, in addition to MSP, that are required for fiber assembly and vesicle movement. One, called MSP polymerization–organizing protein (MPOP), is an integral membrane phosphoprotein that is the only vesicle component needed to build fibers. Tyrosine phosphorylation of MPOP directs MSP polymerization to the membrane surface (LeClaire et al., 2003). The other component is a cytosolic protein, MSP fiber protein 2 (MFP2), expressed as three closely related isoforms all of which incorporate into fibers (Buttery et al., 2003; Grant et al., 2005). Although the exact function of MFP2 is unclear, it is required for fiber assembly and its concentration in sperm extracts modulates the rate of fiber growth.
Here we describe the identification and characterization a third essential component of the MSP motility apparatus, MSP polymerization–activating kinase (MPAK), a 34-kDa putative Ser/Thr kinase. MPAK, which exhibits sequence homology to several members of the casein kinase 1 (CK1) family, binds to MPOP and phosphorylates MFP2. Both interactions are required for fiber formation. Moreover, we show that beads coated with MPAK trigger the assembly of a surrounding cloud of MSP filaments when incubated in a cell-free sperm extract, but only when supplemented with detergent-solubilized MPOP. On the basis of these data, we propose a model for how MPOP, MPAK, and MFP2 interact to induce membrane-associated polymerization and discuss how closely this process parallels localized assembly of the actin machinery even though none of the proteins in the two motility systems are shared.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
; Buttery et al., 2003; LeClaire et al., 2003).
Production of Anti-MPAK Antibody
To generate polyclonal antibodies to MPAK, protein was electroeluted from the Mr 34,000 band in SDS-PAGE gels of 10–25% cut of ammonium sulfate precipitation, dialyzed into PBS, combined with 1 ml of RIBI adjuvant (Corixia, Hamilton, MT), and injected into New Zealand white rabbits using a total of 1 mg of antigen. Antibodies were purified from immune serum using Pierce Immunopure plus Immobilized Protein A/IgG purification kits (Rockford, IL).
Purification of MPAK from S100
S100 was diluted 1:4 with KPM buffer (10 mM potassium phosphate, 0.5 mM MgCl2, pH 6.8) (LeClaire et al., 2003) and centrifuged at 100,000 x g for 1 h to separate the sedimentable vesicle fraction from the soluble cytosolic proteins. The cytosol was fractionated by ammonium sulfate precipitation as described (Buttery et al., 2003). The 10–20% cut, which was enriched in an Mr 34,000 band, was dialyzed against 10 mM sodium phosphate (NaP) buffer, pH 7.0, and injected onto a 5-ml ceramic hydroxyapatite (HA) high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) column (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), equilibrated in the same buffer. Protein was eluted with a 10–250 mM gradient of NaP, pH 7.0. The 34-kDa–enriched fractions, identified by SDS-PAGE, were pooled and dialyzed into immunoaffinity binding buffer (50 mM PBS, 100 mM NaCl, pH 7.2) and applied at 4°C to a column comprised of 1.6 mg of anti-MPAK antibody coupled to Pierce AminoLink Plus gel, as described in the manufacturer's protocol. The column was washed with KPM buffer and then eluted with discontinuous gradient of 100–500 mM NaCl. The eluted fraction was dialyzed against KPM buffer and used immediately or aliquoted for storage at –70°C.
Peptide Sequencing and cDNA Cloning of MPAK
We used methods described for other sperm motility proteins (Buttery et al., 2003) to obtain and sequence four peptides of MPAK by digestion of the Mr 34,000 band from SDS-PAGE gels of a 10–25% cut of ammonium sulfate precipitation of S100 and to obtain a full-length cDNA encoding the protein. The cDNA obtained was inserted into a pCR 2.1 TOPO vector (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) for sequencing of both strands. The full-length cDNA sequence (NCBI accession No. AY326289) was translated by ExPASy translate program. Proteins sequences were aligned using online ClustalW (http://www.ch.embnet.org/software/ClustalW.html) and exported with ESPript (http://espript.ibcp.fr/ESPript/cgi-bin/ESPript.cgi).
Immunofluorescence Microscopy
Fibers grown in vitro were prepared for immunolabeling as described (Buttery et al., 2003; LeClaire et al., 2003). We used anti-MPAK, anti-MPOP (LeClaire et al., 2003), anti-MFP2 (Buttery et al., 2003), and mouse monoclonal anti-phosphotyrosine (anti-pY) and anti-phosphothreonine (anti-pT; Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA) as primary antibodies and AlexaFluor 568– or AlexaFluor 488–conjugated goat anti-mouse or goat anti-rabbit (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR), as appropriate, as secondary antibodies. All antibodies were used at 5 µg/ml for 3 h at 25°C. For controls, primary antibodies were omitted. Immunolabeled cells and fibers were imaged with a Zeiss 510 (Carl Zeiss, Thornwood, NY) laser scanning confocal microscope equipped with dual HeNe laser with appropriate filters or with a Zeiss Axioskop2 microscope equipped with a 40x acroplan/phase objective with appropriate filters and imaged with an Orca 12-bit digital camera (Hamamatsu, Bridgewater, NJ). Images were captured and processed with MetaMorph (Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA) software.
Immunodepletion and Immunoprecipitation
MPAK-depleted extracts were obtained by passing cytosol three times over a column of anti-MPAK antibody coupled to agarose beads (Pierce). Columns constructed with beads bound to IgG from preimmunization serum served as a control. We used SDS-PAGE and Western blotting to monitor the depletion efficiency of the column. Purified MPAK used to replenish these depleted extracts was obtained as described above.
Samples of S100 for immunoprecipitation were incubated in KPM with 0.5% Triton X-100 for 30 min at 25°C and then mixed with equal volume of 2x immunoprecipitation (IP) buffer (2% Triton X-100, 300 mM NaCl, 20 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 2 mM EGTA) followed by immunoprecipitation with appropriate antibody and protein G–coupled agarose beads (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA), which were prewashed three times with IP buffer. The mixture was incubated at 4°C for 3 h. The beads were harvested by centrifugation at 1000 x g for 3 min and then washed five times with IP buffer. The protein composition of immunoprecipitates was analyzed by SDS-PAGE and Western blots.
Additional Protein–Protein Binding Assays
To assay binding of sperm cytosolic proteins to vesicles, S100 was incubated at 4°C with 1 mM ATP for 10 min, diluted 1:5 into KPM buffer, and centrifuged at 100,000 x g for 1 h in a TLA100.3 rotor (Beckman Coulter, Fullerton, CA). The vesicle pellet was resuspended in KPM containing 1.5 M KCl for 1 h to remove peripheral proteins and then washed three times in KPM. The salt-extracted vesicles were incubated in MPAK in KPM for 2 h and then centrifuged at 100,000 g for 1 h to repellet the vesicles. The protein composition of the vesicle pellets was examined by SDS-PAGE gel and Western blots.
To assess further the interaction between MPAK and MPOP, we ran blue native (BN) gels as described by Schagger and von Jagow (1991). To remove low-molecular-weight material from the samples, S100 was spun three times on a 50-kDa molecular weight cutoff filter at 15,000 x g for 30 min at 4°C. After each centrifugation, we added 10 volumes of cold BN cathode buffer (50 mM Tricine, 15 mM Bis-Tris, pH 7.0). After the third centrifugation, samples were brought to 0.5% of TX-100, incubated for 2 h on ice, and then separated on 4–16% BN gels run at 4°C at 100 V constant voltage until the blue dye front reached the bottom. BSA was used as molecular weight marker. The strips were cut from the BN gel, incubated in SDS-PAGE loading buffer for 2 h at 22°C, and placed individually into the wells of 15% SDS-PAGE gels for electrophoresis in the second dimension. SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting were performed according to standard protocols. Membranes were probed first with anti-MPOP antibody, rinsed with TBST overnight, blocked with 0.5% BSA in TBST, and blotted again with anti-MPAK antibody.
Pharmacological Studies
We tested the effects of five protein kinase inhibitors, including bisindolylmaleimide-1 (Bisin-1) for protein kinase C, H89 for protein kinase A, IC 261 for casein kinase 1, KN93 for calmodulin kinase, and protein kinase G inhibitor (PKG-I) for PKG. S100 was diluted 1:10 with KPM in the presence of each reagent individually. Fiber assembly was triggered by addition of 1 mM ATP. The concentration used for each inhibitor was 10- to 100- fold greater than its Ki (Bisin-1, 1 µM; H89, 1 µM; IC 261, 200 µM; KN93, 300 µM; and PKG-I, 10 mM).
In Vitro Kinase Assays
We used in vitro assays to test phosphorylation of two proteins, casein and MFP2, by MPAK. Casein was obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Partially purified MFP2 was obtained from the cytosolic fraction of S100 by sequential molecular size exclusion chromatography and anion exchange chromatography (Buttery et al., 2003). The assays were performed in a total volume of 30 µl containing of 1.5 µM purified MPAK, 
5 µM casein or MFP2, and 4 µCi of [
-32P]ATP in kinase reaction buffer (20 mM Tris·Cl, pH 7.5, 5 mM MgCl2, 150 mM KCl). In control assays either MPAK or the target protein was omitted from the reaction. The reaction mixtures were incubated for 30 min at 23oC and stopped by the addition of 5x loading buffer. After heating to 95°C for 5 min, the mixtures were separated on 15% gels by SDS-PAGE. The gels were dried, exposed to phosphorscreen, and analyzed on a STORM phosphoimager (Amersham Biosciences, Piscataway, NJ).
To complement these tests of the enzymatic activity of MPAK, we also used immunolabeling to assess the kinase activity of the protein. These assays were performed in a total volume of 30 µl comprised of 1.5 µM purified MPAK, 5 µM MFP2, and 2 mM ATP. The reactions were incubated for 3 h at room temperature and then stopped by addition of same amount of 2x SDS-PAGE buffer. The phosphorylation state of protein was examined with SDS-PAGE and Western blot using anti-phosphothreonine (Cell Signaling Technology), anti-phosphoserine (Chemicon, Temecula, CA), and anti-phosphotyrosine antibodies. In control assays we omitted either MPAK or MFP2 from the reaction mixture.
Filament Assembly on MPAK-coated Beads
Carboxylated polystyrene beads (2-µm diameter) were coated with a fraction enriched in MPAK (3 µM), obtained by passing cytosol over an anti-MPAK immunoaffinity column. Bead were incubated for 1 h at room temperature, followed by BSA (10 mg/ml) for another 15 min to block remaining free adsorption sites, and then sedimented, washed with KPM buffer, and resuspended in the same buffer. To determine if the MPAK-coated beads triggered MSP polymerization, aliquots were added to S100 that had been treated with 0.5% Triton X-100 on ice for 1 h to lyse membrane vesicles and then diluted 1:5 with KPM. BSA-coated beads were used as controls. In some assays we added 3 µM Alexa-488–labeled MSP to enable detection of bead-associated polymerization by fluorescence. ATP was added to initiate filament assembly and the samples were incubated for 30 min. Samples containing Alexa 488-MSP were examined by fluorescence microscopy. Digital images were captured and processed using MetaMorph software as described above. Samples for electron microscopy were incubated on a 7 x 10-mm glass coverslips for 45 min, fixed for 20 min in 2.5% glutaraldehyde, washed with KPM, dehydrated in ethanol, and critical point dried as described previously (Ris, 1985). Platinum replicas were prepared according to method described previously (LeClaire et al., 2003) and examined on a Philips (Wilmington, DE) CM 120 electron microscope operated at 80 kV.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
). To determine whether this protein was a fiber component, we generated a polyclonal antibody to the protein extracted from the Mr 34-kDa band on SDS-PAGE gels. This antibody labeled only a single Mr 34-kDa band on Western blots of cytosol (Figure 1A) and also labeled fibers by indirect immunofluorescence with the signal localized at the vesicle-bearing end of the fiber (Figure 1, B and C).
|
|
34-kDa band, we used the sequences of four peptides (Figure 3A) obtained by endo-LysC digestion of the 34-kDa band eluted from SDS-PAGE gels to prepare degenerate oligonucleotide primers for RT-PCR against total polyA+ RNA obtained from Ascaris testis. These probes identified a single full-length cDNA the sequence of which predicted a 34-kDa polypeptide that matched exactly the sequences of all four peptides from the 34-kDa band and exhibited 67% amino acid identity (205/307) to two predicted proteins, C39H7.1 and Y38H8A.3, from Caenorhabditis elegans (Figure 3A), both of which exhibit spermatogenesis-enriched expression in microarray analyses (Reinke et al., 2000). Searches of sequence databases indicated that the 34-kDa protein from Ascaris sperm and its homologues in C. elegans are putative members of the CK1 family of protein serine/threonine kinases. The kinase domain of known CK1s is highly conserved. Within this region, which comprises residues 14–298 of the 34-kDa polypeptide, the sperm protein sequence shares 15% amino acid identity and 54% similarity with other members of the CK1 family (Figure 3A). We found that the 34-kDa protein, purified from S100 (Figure 2D), phosphorylated purified casein in the presence of -32P-ATP (Figure 3B), which was consistent with its sequence similarity to CK1. Moreover, IC261, a CK1 inhibitor, blocked phosphorylation of casein in this assay. Thus, the 34-kDa protein appears to be a member of the CK1 family on the basis of both sequence and enzymatic activity. On the basis of these data and studies of the function of the 34-kDa protein in assembly of the MSP cytoskeleton (see below), we refer to the protein hereafter as MPAK.
|
MPAK Is Recruited to the Membrane by Interaction with Phosphorylated MPOP
Previous work showed that MPOP, the integral membrane phosphoprotein that determines the site of MSP polymerization, is located in the lamellipodial plasma membrane of Ascaris sperm and in the vesicles that build fibers in S100 (LeClaire et al., 2003). Immunofluorescence labeling showed that MPAK colocalized with phospho-MPOP (labeled with anti-pY antibody; see LeClaire et al., 2003) at the vesicle at the growing end of the fiber (Figure 4) Both proteins were localized to the vesicle surface and, in most cases, the labeling was particularly pronounced at the vesicle-fiber interface.
|
|
48-kDa band that labeled with both anti-MPOP and anti-pY antibodies on Western blots (Figure 5B). Therefore, at least part of the MPOP that coimmunoprecipitated by anti-MPAK antibody was phosphorylated. In the reciprocal assay, immunoprecipitation of Triton-treated S100 with anti-pY brought down phosphorylated MPOP and MPAK (Figure 5B).
Third, we used vesicles harvested from S100 to assess further the interaction between MPAK and MPOP. When these vesicles were isolated by centrifugation, they contained associated MPAK, as judged by SDS-PAGE and Western blots (Figure 5C). Treatment of the isolated vesicles with 1.5 M KCl removed all detectable MPAK (Figure 5C). When these salt-extracted vesicles were washed into KPM buffer, incubated with purified MPAK in the presence of ATP, and then pelleted by centrifugation, MPAK cosedimented with the vesicles. However, when the salt-extracted vesicles were incubated with MPAK and ATP in the presence of YOP, a protein tyrosine phosphatase from Yersinia enterocolytica shown previously to dephosphorylate MPOP (LeClaire et al., 2003), the MPOP in the vesicles no longer labeled with anti-pY, and no detectable MPAK cosedimented with the vesicles (Figure 5C). These data suggest that MPAK associated with the vesicle by binding to phosphorylated MPOP.
Fourth, we used YOP to ask if dephosphorylation of MPOP on vesicles that had assembled fibers affected the localization of MPAK at the vesicle–fiber interface. As shown in Figure 5D, when growing fibers were washed with KPM buffer and then fixed for immunofluorescence, they retained both anti-pY and anti-MPAK labeling. By contrast, fibers treated before fixation with KPM containing YOP failed to label with either anti-pY or anti-MPAK. Thus, treatment of fiber-associated vesicles with YOP not only dephosphorylated MPOP but also released bound MPAK from the vesicle-fiber interface.
MFP2 Is Phosphorylated by MPAK
Fiber elongation is driven by polymerization at the vesicle-fiber interface (Roberts et al., 1998), where MPOP and MPAK are located, and the rate of fiber growth is modulated by MFP2 (Buttery et al., 2003), probably operating at the site of filament assembly. Therefore, we reasoned that MFP2 may be a target of the kinase activity of MPAK. To test this hypothesis, we obtained an MFP2-enriched fraction from S100 by sequential centrifugation, molecular exclusion chromatography, and anion exchange chromatography (Figure 6A; see also Buttery et al., 2003) and combined this material with purified MPAK in the presence of -32P-ATP. These conditions resulted in prominent 32P-labeling of MFP2, the most abundant protein in the immunoprecipitate, but none of the other proteins in the MFP2-enriched fraction was labeled (Figure 6B). Moreover, we detected no labeling of MFP2 when MPAK was omitted. To assess further the phosphorylation of MFP2 by MPAK, we repeated the incubation of the MFP2-enriched fraction with purified MPAK, in this case in the presence of unlabeled ATP. After incubation of in the presence of the kinase, MFP2 labeled with anti-phosphothreonine (anti-pT) antibody on Western blots (Figure 6B). By contrast, when MFP2 was incubated with ATP alone, we were unable to detect phosphorylation of the protein on anti-pT Western blots (Figure 6B). Addition of anti-MPAK antibody or the CK1 inhibitor, IC 261, blocked the phosphorylation of MFP2 by MPAK (data not shown). MFP2 incubated with MPAK did not label with either anti-pY or anti-phosphoserine on Western blots, and neither of these antibodies immunoprecipitated MFP2 from S100. Thus, MPAK appears to phosphorylate MFP2 exclusively on threonine residues.
|
|
MPAK-coated Beads Trigger MSP Polymerization
To assess further the role of MPAK in MSP filament assembly, we asked if plastic beads coated with the kinase could trigger MSP polymerization. Because of the high concentration of protein required for these assays, we obtained MPAK directly from cytosol by anti-MPAK immunoaffinity chromatography. The fraction obtained in this way was enriched in MPAK but also contained small amount of MFP2 and MSP. When beads coated with this MPAK-enriched fraction were incubated in Triton-treated S100 supplemented with Alexa 488-MSP, a cloud of fluorescence formed around the beads (Figure 8, A and B). Examination of platinum replicas of similar beads by EM showed that the cloud of fluorescent MSP corresponded to a dense meshwork of filaments surrounding the beads (Figure 8C). These preparations also contained a looser meshwork of filaments in the background. When we used control beads, coated with BSA in place of MPAK, in these assays, we still observed filaments in the background but there was no accumulation of filaments on the bead itself (Figure 8, D and F). Moreover, neither MSP nor MFP2, the other proteins in the MPAK-enriched fraction used to coat the beads, stimulated MSP filament assembly alone or in combination (data not shown). MPAK-coated beads did not form filament clouds when they were incubated in S100 that had not been treated with detergent and, thus, contained intact vesicles. Likewise, no filament clouds formed when coated beads were incubated in S100 depleted of vesicles by centrifugation. Thus, the polymerization of MSP on MPAK-coated beads appears to depend on the presence of solubilized vesicle components, presumably MPOP.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
) and cell body retraction (Miao et al., 2003) in amoeboid cell motility. To capitalize fully on this powerful experimental system, it is necessary identify the full roster of the components required for motility. Previous work identified MPOP and MFP2 as essential components of the motility apparatus, but these proteins alone are not sufficient to build fibers when added to MSP and ATP (Buttery et al., 2003; LeClaire et al., 2003). We have now identified a third accessory protein, MPAK, required to generate protrusion by membrane-associated MSP polymerization. Further, we have shown that MPAK is a serine/threonine kinase that couples the activities of MPOP and MFP2 by binding to phospho-MPOP and by phosphorylating MFP2. Some caution is appropriate in assigning a specific cellular function to a protein isolated from a cellular extract, especially considering that, despite extensive effort, we have not able to obtain active MPAK by bacterial expression. However, several lines of evidence suggest that MPAK is responsible for the activities described in this study. First, both the casein kinase activity of the native protein and its effect on fiber growth are inhibited by the CK1 inhibitor, IC 261, and not by inhibitors of other Ser/Thr kinases. Second, the four peptides obtained from native material matched exactly the sequence predicted from the MPAK cDNA. Third, an antibody raised against the native protein recognized the insoluble bacterially expressed protein encoded by the MPAK cDNA. Finally, the same antibody blocked the phosphorylation of MFP2 by MPAK and inhibited fiber assembly in S100. These results are all consistent with the 34-kDa protein isolated from S100 being responsible for the activities we have identified for MPAK.
All of the accessory proteins in the Ascaris MSP motility apparatus that have been sequenced have homologues in C. elegans, but in all previous cases these homologues are predicted proteins with no assigned function and are encoded in genes that have not been defined by mutation (Buttery et al., 2003; LeClaire et al., 2003). Thus, MPAK is the first MSP motility component that has significant sequence homology to a protein with a common fold and a well-defined activity. The CK1 family to which MPAK belongs is a subset of the serine/threonine kinases that is expressed ubiquitously in eukaryotes and is involved in a broad range of cellular activities (Knippschild et al., 2005). Like other CK1s, the predicted kinase domain of MPAK is located near in the N-terminal region of the sequence and is flanked by a C-terminal noncatalytic domain. The length and sequence of these C-terminal domains differ substantially among the CK1s. The C-terminal region of MPAK is particularly short (8 residues), thus accounting for the lower molecular mass of this protein compared with the 37–51 kDa range that is more typical for the members of the CK1 family.
Our data suggest that the interactions among MPOP, MPAK, and MFP2 direct MSP polymerization to the membrane at the leading edge of the lamellipod. Previous work (LeClaire et al., 2003) established that MPOP is the only membrane protein required for fiber assembly. Our antibody inhibition tests and immunodepletion/add-back assays established that MPAK is also necessary for fiber assembly. Moreover, comigration of MPAK and MPOP on native gels together with reciprocal immunoprecipitation of the two proteins with antibodies to MPAK and tyrosine phosphorylated MPOP showed that these proteins interact in a complex mixture consistent with the interaction being highly specific. The disruption of this interaction by dephosphorylation of MPOP, both on the vesicles used in pulldown assays and also on the vesicles attached to growing fibers indicates that MPAK is recruited to the membrane surface by binding to phosphorylated MPOP. These results are consistent with previous studies that showed that addition of YOP to S100 blocks fiber elongation (Italiano et al., 1996; Miao et al., 2003) and indicate that this effect of YOP is due, at least in part, to the loss of MPAK from the site of filament assembly upon dephosphorylation of MPOP. The sensitivity of the interaction of the two proteins to tyrosine phosphorylation implies that MPAK may bind to phosphotyrosine residues on MPOP. However, the sequence of MPAK does not include an SH2 domain by which many effector molecules bind to phosphorylated tyrosine residues on the cytoplasmic domain of membrane proteins (Felder et al., 1993). Thus, the binding of these two proteins appears to involve a different phosphorylation-dependent molecular interaction.
Our data also indicate that the presence of both MPOP and MPAK are required to trigger MSP polymerization at the membrane. For example, we found that the assembly of filaments around MPAK-coated beads did not occur unless extracts were supplemented with solubilized MPOP. This observation suggests that MPOP may turn on the catalytic activity of MPAK. However, purified MPAK phosphorylated both casein and MFP2 in the absence of MPOP. Therefore, MPOP is not required to activate MPAK and it may be that each protein plays an essential but independent role in assembling the MSP motility apparatus.
Although there may be additional substrates for MPAK, we have shown that MFP2 is a primary target of the enzyme and that the phosphorylation of MFP2 is associated with its incorporation into fibers. MFP2 is required for fiber assembly and, although its exact function is not known, the protein enhances the rate of MSP polymerization thereby increasing the rate of fiber elongation (Buttery et al., 2003). Thus, the protein likely exerts its effect at the growing end of the fiber where filaments are assembled. However, unlike its partner proteins, MPOP and MPAK, MFP2 is not concentrated at the vesicle-fiber interface and, instead, is distributed throughout the fiber (Buttery et al., 2003). Therefore, MFP2 may be activated by MPAK-catalyzed phosphorylation at the growing end of a fiber where it modulates the rate of polymerization and then remains bound to the MSP filament system as fiber elongation continues and the vesicle moves away.
Like the MSP-based motility of nematode sperm, the localized polymerization of actin filaments is used to move membranes, either in the form of protrusion of the leading edge of crawling cells (Borisy and Svitkina, 2000) or the intracellular movement of membrane vesicles, bacteria, and other pathogens by actin comet tails (Cameron et al., 2000). Although the identities of the molecular players in the MSP and actin systems differ, the overall scheme by which they operate to direct filament assembly to the membrane surface has some intriguing parallels. For example, in actin-based cells a number of different membrane proteins, depending on cell type, define sites of filament assembly by recruiting and activating a member of the WASp/Scar family of proteins to the membrane surface, an interaction that is analogous to that of MPOP-MPAK. Activated WASp, in turn activates the Arp2/3 complex resulting in the nucleation and elongation of actin filaments near the membrane (Rohatgi et al., 1999; reviewed in Pollard and Borisy, 2003) to form a branched filament network. The role of MPAK appears generally analogous to that of WASp as it phosphorylates MFP2 and perhaps other components needed to assemble fibers. Thus, although the MSP cytoskeleton consists of a meshwork of individual filaments and not the branched network characteristic of Arp2/3-nucleated actin filament array, the two systems both use a series of protein interactions to direct assembly of the force-generating machinery to the site of membrane protrusion. The identification of MPAK and its essential role in linking MSP filament assembly to the plasma membrane lays the groundwork for a deeper understanding of the biochemistry of MSP-based motility and should enable a more detailed comparison of MSP- and actin-based motility to define the shared features of the two systems that power amoeboid cell motility.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Present address: Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115. 
Address correspondence to: Thomas M. Roberts (roberts{at}bio.fsu.edu).
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Buttery, S. M., Ekman, G. C., Seavy, M., Stewart, M., Roberts, T. M. (2003). Dissection of the Ascaris sperm motility machinery identifies key proteins involved in major sperm protein-based amoeboid locomotion. Mol. Biol. Cell 14, 5082–5088.
Cameron, L. A., Giardini, P. A., Soo, F. S., Theriot, J. A. (2000). Secrets of actin-based motility revealed by a bacterial pathogen. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol 1, 110–119.[Medline]
Felder, S., Zhou, M., Hu, P., Urena, J., Ullrich, A., Chaudhuri, M., White, M., Shoelson, S. E., Schlessinger, J. (1993). SH2 domains exhibit high-affinity binding to tyrosine-phosphorylated peptides yet also exhibit rapid dissociation and exchange. Mol. Cell. Biol 13, 1449–1455.
Grant, R. P., Buttery, S. M., Ekman, G. C., Roberts, T. M., Stewart, M. (2005). Structure of MFP2 and its function in enhancing MSP polymerization in Ascaris sperm amoeboid motility. J. Mol. Biol 347, 583–595.[CrossRef][Medline]
Italiano, J. E. Jr, Roberts, T. M., Stewart, M., Fontana, C. A. (1996). Reconstitution in vitro of the motile apparatus from the amoeboid sperm of Ascaris shows that filament assembly and bundling move membranes. Cell 84, 105–114.[CrossRef][Medline]
Italiano, J. E. Jr, Stewart, M., Roberts, T. M. (2001). How the assembly dynamics of the nematode major sperm protein generate amoeboid cell motility. Int. Rev. Cytol 202, 1–34.[Medline]
Knippschild, U., Wolff, S., Giamas, G., Brockschmidt, C., Wittau, M., Wurl, P. U., Eismann, T., Stoter, M. (2005). The role of the casein kinase 1 (CK1) family in different signaling pathways linked to cancer development. Onkologie 28, 508–514.[CrossRef][Medline]
LeClaire, L. L. III, Stewart, M., Roberts, T. M. (2003). A 48 kDa integral membrane phosphoprotein orchestrates the cytoskeletal dynamics that generate amoeboid cell motility in Ascaris sperm. J. Cell Sci 116, 2655–2663.
Loisel, T. P., Boujemaa, R., Pantaloni, D., Carlier, M. F. (1999). Reconstitution of actin-based motility of Listeria and Shigella using pure proteins. Nature 401, 613–616.[CrossRef][Medline]
Miao, L., Vanderlinde, O., Stewart, M., Roberts, T. M. (2003). Retraction in amoeboid cell motility powered by cytoskeletal dynamics. Science 302, 1405–1407.
Mitchison, T. J. and Cramer, L. P. (1996). Actin-based cell motility and cell locomotion. Cell 84, 371–379.[CrossRef][Medline]
Mogilner, A. (2006). On the edge: modeling protrusion. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol 18, 32–39.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pollard, T. D. and Borisy, G. G. (2003). Cellular motility driven by assembly and disassembly of actin filaments. Cell 112, 453–465.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rafelski, S. M. and Theriot, J. A. (2004). Crawling toward a unified model of cell motility: spatial and temporal regulation of actin dynamics. Annu. Rev. Biochem 73, 209–239.[CrossRef][Medline]
Reinke, V., et al. (2000). A. global profile of germline gene expression in C. elegans. Mol. Cell 6, 605–616.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ris, H. (1985). The cytoplasmic filament system in critical point-dried whole mounts and plastic-embedded sections. J. Cell Biol 100, 1474–1487.
Roberts, T. M., Salmon, E. D., Stewart, M. (1998). Hydrostatic pressure shows that lamellipodial motility in Ascaris sperm requires membrane-associated major sperm protein filament nucleation and elongation. J. Cell Biol 140, 367–375.
Roberts, T. M. and Stewart, M. (2000). Acting like actin. The dynamics of the nematode major sperm protein (msp) cytoskeleton indicate a push-pull mechanism for amoeboid cell motility. J. Cell Biol 149, 7–12.
Rohatgi, R., Ma, L., Miki, H., Lopez, M., Kirchhausen, T., Takenawa, T., Kirschner, M. W. (1999). The interaction between N-WASP and the Arp2/3 complex links Cdc42-dependent signals to actin assembly. Cell 97, 221–231.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schagger, H. and von Jagow, G. (1991). Blue native electrophoresis for isolation of membrane protein complexes in enzymatically active form. Anal. Biochem 199, 223–231.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sepsenwol, S., Ris, H., Roberts, T. M. (1989). A unique cytoskeleton associated with crawling in the amoeboid sperm of the nematode, Ascaris suum. J. Cell Biol 108, 55–66.
Stewart, M. and Roberts, T. M. (2005). Cytoskeletal dynamics powers nematode sperm motility. Adv. Prot. Chem 71, 384–399.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
p34) of cytosol after three passes over an anti-p34 immunoaffinity column and a Western blot of the same material probed with anti-p34 antibody. The 34-kDa protein could not be detected after immunodepletion. (D) Sequential purification of the 34-kDa protein from Ascaris sperm extracts. CYTO, cytosol fraction obtained by centrifugation of S100; AS, 10–20% cut obtained by ammonium sulfate precipitation of the CYTO fraction; HA, 34-kDa protein-enriched fraction separated from the 10–20% cut by hydroxyapatite chromatography (the CYTO, AS, and HA lanes were Coomassie-stained); IAP: silver-stained lane of the protein obtained from the 34-kDa protein-enriched HA fraction by immunoaffinity purification by passage over an anti-p34 affinity column. WB, Western blot of the material shown in the IAP lane probed with anti-p34 antibody. Numerals indicate the position of molecular weight markers in kDa for both C and D. (E and F) Fiber assembly in depletion/add-back assays. Addition of vesicles, MSP, and ATP to the 34-kDa protein-depleted fraction shown in C failed to trigger fiber assembly (E). However, addition of the 34-kDa protein purified as shown in D to the depleted material along with vesicles, MSP, and ATP resulted in the formation of numerous fibers (F). Bars, 5 µm in B and F.
from humans (Hs, NP_001885), CK1-
from mouse (Mm, NP_620690), CK1 from Drosophila melanogaster (Dm, AAC39134), and spe-6 from C. elegans (Ce, NP_499482). Completely conserved residues are highlighted in red and nearly conserved ones in yellow. The sequence of MPAK (AY326289) is also aligned with that of its C. elegans homolog, C39H7.1; asterisks represent identical residues, colons indicate highly conservative substitutions, and periods denote less conservative differences. The sequence of Y38H8A.3, a closely related predicted protein from C. elegans, is shown below that of C39H7.1. The four peptide sequences obtained via proteolysis of MPAK and used to generate oligonucleotides for RT-PCR are underlined in the MPAK sequence. The sequence of each peptide is identical to the predicted amino acid sequence from the MPAK cDNA. (B) Autoradiogram of an SDS-PAGE gel of kinase assays of purified MPAK. Components incubated with 32P-ATP in the kinase assays are indicated above the gel lanes. Casein was phosphorylated by MPAK and the casein 1 kinase inhibitor, IC 261, blocked this activity. No phosphorylation was detected with MPAK or casein alone. Numerals indicate the positions of molecular weight markers in kDa.
