|
|
|
|
Vol. 9, Issue 7, 1725-1739, July 1998
Department of Cell Biology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8002
Submitted November 24, 1997; Accepted April 17, 1998| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The accurate targeting of secretory vesicles to distinct sites on the plasma membrane is necessary to achieve polarized growth and to establish specialized domains at the surface of eukaryotic cells. Members of a protein complex required for exocytosis, the exocyst, have been localized to regions of active secretion in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae where they may function to specify sites on the plasma membrane for vesicle docking and fusion. In this study we have addressed the function of one member of the exocyst complex, Sec10p. We have identified two functional domains of Sec10p that act in a dominant-negative manner to inhibit cell growth upon overexpression. Phenotypic and biochemical analysis of the dominant-negative mutants points to a bifunctional role for Sec10p. One domain, consisting of the amino-terminal two-thirds of Sec10p directly interacts with Sec15p, another exocyst component. Overexpression of this domain displaces the full-length Sec10 from the exocyst complex, resulting in a block in exocytosis and an accumulation of secretory vesicles. The carboxy-terminal domain of Sec10p does not interact with other members of the exocyst complex and expression of this domain does not cause a secretory defect. Rather, this mutant results in the formation of elongated cells, suggesting that the second domain of Sec10p is required for morphogenesis, perhaps regulating the reorientation of the secretory pathway from the tip of the emerging daughter cell toward the mother-daughter connection during cell cycle progression.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The polarized transport of secretory vesicles to
distinct domains of the plasma membrane helps to establish the
directionality of cell growth in eukaryotic cell types as diverse as
yeast, epithelial cells, and developing neurons. The budding yeast
Saccharomyces cerevisiae has proven to be a particularly
useful system for the genetic identification of proteins required for
vesicular transport (Novick et al., 1980
). The terminal
stage of the yeast-secretory pathway relies on 10 SEC gene
products (Sec1p, Sec2p, Sec3p, Sec4p, Sec5p, Sec6p, Sec8p, Sec9p,
Sec10p, and Sec15p) (Novick et al., 1981
), as well as the
Snc (Gerst et al., 1992
; Protopopov et al., 1993
)
and Sso proteins (Aalto et al., 1993
). Mammalian homologues have been identified for most of these yeast proteins (Bennett and
Scheller, 1994
; Ferro-Novick and Jahn, 1994
; Rothman, 1994
). This
evolutionary conservation may reflect the importance of these components of the secretory machinery for all eukaryotic cells. The
challenge now is to establish the physical and functional relationships
among these proteins and to define their mechanism of action in vesicle
targeting, docking, and fusion.
Research into the mechanisms of vesicle targeting and fusion has
focused most intensely on two groups of proteins: a set of proteins
collectively called SNAREs (soluble
N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein
receptors), and a family of low molecular weight GTP-binding proteins,
known as the Rab proteins. Specific SNAREs are required for each stage
of vesicular transport (Ferro-Novick and Jahn, 1994
; Rothman, 1994
;
Rothman and Wieland, 1996
). The current hypothesis suggests that an
interaction between SNAREs on the vesicle (v-SNAREs) and cognate SNAREs
on the target membrane (t-SNAREs) ensures close spatial proximity
between the two membranes for vesicle fusion (Sollner et
al., 1993a
,b
). In post-Golgi transport in yeast, the v-SNARE is
encoded by SNC1/2 and the t-SNAREs by SSO1/2 and
SEC9 (Aalto et al., 1991
, 1993
; Gerst et
al., 1992
; Protopopov et al., 1993
; Brennwald et
al., 1994
).
The family of Rab GTPases, whose founding member is the yeast Sec4
protein (Salminen and Novick, 1987
), act as nucleotide-dependent molecular switches to control membrane traffic (Bourne et
al., 1990
; Novick and Brennwald, 1993
; Zerial and Stenmark, 1993
). However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the action of Rabs remain
unknown to date. Rab proteins may act to promote SNARE complex
formation by activating individual SNAREs (Dascher et al.,
1991
; Novick and Brennwald, 1993
; Lian et al., 1994
; Sogaard et al., 1994
). This idea is mainly based on genetic studies
in yeast. At the ER to Golgi stage, cells defective in the Rab
homologue Ypt1 fail to form the relevant SNARE complex (Lian et
al., 1994
; Sogaard et al., 1994
), and the
overexpression of SNARE components can bypass the lethality of a
deletion of YPT1. Furthermore, at the post-Golgi stage of
transport, overexpression of the t-SNARE Sec9p can bypass the growth
defect of a cold-sensitive mutation of Sec4p (Brennwald et
al., 1994
). Although these findings suggest a role for Rab
proteins in SNARE complex formation, it is unclear whether the SNARE
activation is direct or indirect.
Rab proteins may not only function in the activation of SNARE proteins,
but may also act on the cytoskeleton to polarize vesicular transport.
Activated forms of Rab8 have recently been found to cause changes in
the morphology of cultured fibroblasts resulting in the outgrowth of
cellular processes (Peranen et al., 1996
). These
morphological changes were correlated with rearrangements of the actin
cytoskeleton and microtubules, both of which relocalize to the newly
formed processes. Sec4p is the protein most homologous to Rab8 in
budding yeast (Huber et al., 1993
). The nucleotide state of
Sec4p is critical for its role in polarized vesicle transport. If
Sec2p, the guanyl nucleotide exchange factor for Sec4p, is mutated
thereby decreasing the amount of GTP-bound Sec4p, vesicles accumulate
randomly in the mother cell instead of concentrating at the tip of the
daughter cell (Walch-Solimena et al., 1997
).
Of the remaining proteins required for post-Golgi transport in yeast,
six (Sec3p, Sec5p, Sec6p, Sec8p, Sec10p, Sec15p, and a previously
uncharacterized protein termed Exo70p) form a multisubunit complex
termed the exocyst (TerBush and Novick, 1995
; TerBush et
al., 1996
). A similar, high-molecular weight complex has recently been purified from brain (Hsu et al., 1996
), and the
mammalian homologues of Sec6p, Sec8p, and Sec10p have been cloned (Ting et al., 1995
; Guo et al., 1997
; Hazuka et
al., 1997
). This evolutionary conservation of the members of the
exocyst may reflect their importance for the flow of vesicles from the
Golgi to the plasma membrane in all eukaryotic cells (TerBush et
al., 1996
). An important clue to the function of the exocyst stems
from the concentration of some of its members at sites of active
secretion at the bud tip or at the mother-daughter connection in yeast
(TerBush and Novick, 1995
; Mondesert et al., 1997
; Finger
et al., 1998
). It has, therefore, been hypothesized that the
exocyst acts as a "target patch" for the delivery of vesicles to
sites of active surface growth (Drubin and Nelson, 1996
).
Genetic data in yeast suggest a close interplay between individual
members of the exocyst and the Rab homologue Sec4p (Salminen and
Novick, 1987
). Temperature-sensitive alleles of most members of the
exocyst (sec3-2, sec5-24, sec8-9, sec10-2 and
sec15-1) are synthetically lethal with the
temperature-sensitive sec4-8 allele (Salminen and Novick,
1987
). Furthermore, simply doubling the amounts of Sec4p within a cell
can suppress the growth defects of sec15-1 and
sec8-9 and, to a lesser extent, of sec5-24, and sec10-2. SEC4 and SEC15 show particularly strong
genetic interactions with each other (Salminen and Novick, 1987
).
In this study we have identified two functional domains of Sec10p. One domain interacts with Sec15p to generate an active exocyst complex while the second domain is involved in morphogenesis, perhaps mediating the reorientation of exocytosis from the bud tip to the neck region during the progression of the cell cycle.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Yeast Genetic Techniques
Table 1 lists the yeast strains
used in this study. Cultures were grown in rich medium (YP) containing
1% Bacto yeast extract and 2% Bacto peptone (Difco Laboratories,
Detroit, MI) or in synthetic medium containing 0.7% yeast nitrogen
base without amino acids (Difco). Synthetic medium was supplemented
with nutrients if necessary as described (Sherman et al.,
1974
). Glucose was generally used as a carbon source (2% final
concentration) except in experiments requiring expression from the
GAL1 promotor. In this case, cells were first grown to early
log phase (A600 ~ 0.2) in YP containing glycerol (2%
final concentration) as a nonfermentable carbon source, and then
shifted to 2% galactose and grown further for 10 h.
|
Yeast transformations were performed with the lithium-acetate method
(Ito et al., 1983
), and transformants were selected on synthetic medium supplemented with nutrients as required at 25°C.
Generation of Sec10 Domains for Expression in Yeast
Sec10 fragments were generated by PCR and subcloned into integrating vectors containing a GAL1 promotor and ADH terminator with URA3 (pNB 530) or LEU2 (pNB 529) as auxotrophic markers. The resulting plasmids were linearized with AflII (for pNB 529-derived plasmids) or with StuI (for pNB 530-derived plasmids) to allow for homologous recombination.
SDS-PAGE and Western Blotting
SDS-PAGE was carried out according to Laemmli (1970)
, and
proteins were transferred onto nitrocellulose (Schleicher & Schuell, Keene, NH). Nonspecific binding sites were blocked with 3% milk in PBS
for 1 h. Proteins were then probed for 1 h at room
temperature with anti-Sec10 antibody at 1:1000 dilution. The filters
were then washed and probed with secondary antibody (HRP-conjugated goat-anti mouse or rabbit IgG) at 1:5000 for 20 min at room temperature in PBMT (PBS containing 3% milk and 0.2% Tween 20). After five washes
in PBMT, blots were developed by ECL (Amersham, Arlington Heights, IL).
Immunofluorescence
Yeast were grown at 25°C to an A600 of approximately 0.2 in YP containing 2% glycerol. Overexpression of proteins from the GAL1 promotor was induced by addition of galactose (2% final concentration) directly to the medium. After a further 10 h of growth, 5 A600 units of cells were fixed for 4 h at room temperature by addition of an equal volume of fixative solution (8% formaldehyde in 2× PBS) to the medium.
For cell wall removal, fixed cells were washed twice in KPi/sorbitol (0.1 M potassium phosphate, pH 7.4, and 1.2 M sorbitol), resuspended in 0.5 ml KPi/sorbitol containing 0.5% 2-mercaptoethanol and 80 µg/ml zymolyase, and incubated for 30 min at 37°C. Cells were then washed once in cold PBS/BSA (PBS containing 1 mg/ml BSA) and resuspended in 100 µl PBS/BSA. A portion (25 µl) of this cell suspension was applied to eight-well slides (model 10086; Carlson Scientific, Peotone, IL) coated with polylysine (1 mg/ml; MW, 400,000). Cells were then permeabilized with 0.5% SDS in PBS/BSA for 5 min at room temperature and washed 10 times with PBS/BSA before addition of the primary antibodies. Primary antibody incubation was for 1 h at room temperature with the following antibody dilutions into PBS/BSA: affinity-purified anti-Sec10p and affinity-purified anti-Sec15p at 1:100; and monoclonal or polyclonal antiSec4p, anti-Myo2p (gift from S. Reck-Peterson), and monoclonal antiactin (clone C4; ICN, Costa Mesa, CA) at 1:1000 dilution. Before addition of the secondary antibodies, wells were washed 10 times in PBS/BSA. Secondary antibody incubation was for 30 min at room temperature with dichlorotriazinyl-amino fluorescein-conjugated donkey anti-rabbit or Texas Red-conjugated goat anti-mouse antibodies (Jackson Immunoresearch, West Grove, PA) at 1:250 dilutions into PBS/BSA. Wells were washed as above, mounted in antifade solution (90% glycerol, 1 mg/ml p-phenylenediamine), and sealed with nail varnish. Cells were observed with a Zeiss Axiophot (Carl Zeiss, Thornwood, NY) using a 100× objective. For double-labeling experiments, cells were incubated sequentially with primary and respective secondary antibody solutions to the first antigen followed by incubations with primary and secondary antibodies to the second antigen.
TRITC-Concanavalin A (TRITC-Con A) Staining
For cell wall labeling, 5 A600 units of cells grown as before in YP glycerol/galactose were pelleted, resuspended in 100 µl YP, and incubated with 10 µg/ml TRITC-Con A for 5 min at room temperature in the dark. Cells were then washed three times to remove unbound TRITC-Con A and incubated further in YP-galactose. Wild-type cells and cells overexpressing Sec10CT were grown for 1 h after TRITC-Con A labeling before fixing and mounting on slides. Observation of the cells was with a 100× objective and a Zeiss axiophot.
Electron Microscopy
Cells were grown in YP-glycerol, and overexpression of proteins
was induced by addition of galactose to the medium as described for the
immunofluorescence. Preparation of cells for electron microscopy was as
previously described (Salminen and Novick, 1987
). In brief, 10 A600 units of cells were fixed in 2% glutaraldehyde and
washed, and the cell wall was removed by incubation in KPi/sorbitol containing 80 µg/ml zymolyase at 37°C. The extent of cell wall removal was monitored by light microscopy. Cells were then stained with
osmium tetroxide and uranyl acetate, dehydrated, and embedded in
low-viscosity epoxy resin (Spurr; Polysciences, Warrington, PA). Blocks
were sectioned and poststained with uranyl acetate and lead citrate.
Immunoprecipitations from [35S]-Methionine/Cysteine-labeled Cells
Yeast were grown to early log phase in YP-glycerol, and then shifted to synthetic media with 2% galactose for 10 h. For metabolic labeling, 5 A600 units of cells per immunoprecipitation were incubated with 10 µl of label mix (14.3 µCi/µl of [35S]-methionine/cysteine; Amersham, Arlington Heights, IL) for 4 h at 25°C. Spheroplasts were prepared by incubation in KPi/sorbitol containing 80 µg/ml zymolyase and 0.5% 2-mercaptoethanol at 37°C for 20 min. For cell lysis, cells were washed with KPi/sorbitol and resuspended in 1 ml of cold IP buffer [20 mM piperazine-N,N'-bis-(ethanesulfonic acid), pH 6.8, 100 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% Tween 20, 2 µM PMSF, 10 µM antipain, 30 µM chymostatin, 1 µM pepstatin, 1 µg/ml aprotinin, and 30 µM leupeptin]. The lysates were centrifuged at 14,000 × g for 10 min at 4°C and precleared with 4 mg/ml protein A Sepharose for 1 h at 4 C. Immunoprecipitations were performed for 2 h at 4°C with anti-Sec10 affinity-purified antibodies at 1:100 dilution or anti-myc 9E10 ascites at 1:500 dilution. Antibodies were precipitated by further incubation for 1 h at 4°C with 4 mg/ml protein A Sepharose. Beads were then washed five times in IP buffer, resuspended in 80 µl SDS sample buffer, and boiled, and released proteins were loaded onto SDS-polyacrylamide gels. Gels were fixed, incubated in autofluor (National Diagnostics, Atlanta, GA), dried, and exposed to film (Kodak X-Omat AR, Rochester, NY).
In Vitro Transcription/Translation
Constructs for the in vitro transcription/translation were generated by PCR and subcloned into mammalian expression vectors containing a CMV promotor. Preparation of [35S]-cysteine and -methionine-labeled proteins was carried out with an in vitro transcription/translation kit according to the manufacturer's instructions (Promega, Madison, WI). For binding experiments, the proteins to be tested for binding were cotranscribed/translated in vitro. After the transcription/translation reaction, 3 µl of the reaction mixture were diluted 100-fold into IP buffer (see above), and immunoprecipitations were performed as described above. In the end, beads were resuspended in 25 µl SDS sample buffer and boiled, and released proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE. Gels were fixed and dried, and radioactive bands were visualized by autoradiography.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Construction of Dominant-Negative Fragments of Sec10p
The yeast Sec10 protein and its homologues in
Caenorhabditis elegans and mammals share sequence
identity on the order of 20-25%. Major regions of homology are
contained in three blocks of approximately 150 amino acids each,
present at the N terminus, the middle region, and the C terminus of
Sec10p as indicated in Figure 1A. The
amino-terminal block contains a domain (amino acids 77-98) predicted
to form a coiled-coil structure. The carboxy-terminal block is somewhat more hydrophobic than the rest of the protein, as predicted by the
algorithm of Kyte and Doolittle (1982)
(Figure 1A).
|
Given the conservation of amino acid residues in the N terminus and the
C terminus together with the hydrophobicity of the C terminus, we
investigated whether these regions of the protein might constitute
distinct functional domains of Sec10p. Based on the hydropathy plot and
the conserved regions, we constructed three fragments of Sec10p, termed
Sec10NT, Sec10
C, and Sec10CT. Sec10NT comprised a 30-kDa fragment
that contained the predicted coiled-coil region and the first region of
homology. Sec10
C comprised the first two regions of homology, while
Sec10CT comprised the more hydrophobic, third region of the protein
(Figure 1A). These fragments were overexpressed in yeast from the
galactose-inducible GAL1 promotor. The rational behind the
approach is that Sec10p may normally interact with several partners
through its different domains. Overexpression of an isolated domain of
Sec10p would compete against the endogenous Sec10p for the binding to
one of its interactive partners. Because such a protein would not be fully functional, it would competitively inhibit the function of the
endogenous full-length Sec10p.
While overexpression of Sec10p itself is not toxic to the cells, we
found that cells overexpressing either Sec10
C or Sec10CT had a
growth defect (Figure 1B). Quantitative immunoblot analysis indicated that Sec10
C was expressed between 200- to 300-fold over
the normal Sec10p level. The growth inhibition suggested that both
Sec10p fragments were able to inhibit the function of the endogenous
protein. The extent of the growth rate inhibition by Sec10
C was
~70%, while Sec10CT overexpression gave ~45% growth rate
inhibition compared with wild type. Sec10NT, although overexpressed, did not cause a growth defect (Figure 1B). The growth inhibition observed upon overexpression of the entire hydrophilic (Sec10
C) or
hydrophobic (Sec10CT) regions of the Sec10p suggests that this protein
has at least two distinct protein-protein interaction domains. The
N-terminal one-third of the protein, which covers the predicted
coiled-coil region, may not constitute a fully functional binding
domain.
Phenotypic Characterization of the Sec10 Dominant-Negative Mutants
When we examined the cells overexpressing Sec10
C or Sec10CT by
light microscopy, we noticed almost diametrically opposite phenotypic
effects on cell morphology (Figure 2,
A-C). Cells that had been grown in YP-glycerol and had been induced
for overexpression of the Sec10 dominant-negative mutants for 10 h
were processed for indirect immunofluorescence and double labeled with
anti-Sec4p and anti-actin antibodies. At this time point, maximal
expression of the Sec10 fragments was reached, and the phenotypic
changes were quite evident. Cells overexpressing Sec10
C were
frequently enlarged, and most cells were unbudded (92% unbudded,
compared with 39% for wild type) or had only small buds (Figure 2B).
The actin cytoskeleton was depolarized, with cortical actin patches present throughout mother and daughter cells, and actin cables were no
longer detectable (Figure 2H). Sec4p staining, marking the location of
secretory vesicles, was still localized to the bud site (Figure 2E).
Cells were usually mononucleate. At this level, the phenotype of these
cells is similar to that of a post-Golgi blocked sec mutant,
such as the temperature-sensitive mutant sec10-2.
|
Cells overexpressing Sec10CT showed a distinctly different phenotype typified by elongated cells (Figure 2C). These cells were 70% longer than the average small budded wild-type cell and 30% longer than the average large budded wild-type cell. Actin was predominantly present at the tip of the bud, but also extended to the neck region (Figure 2I). Interestingly, Sec4p staining was frequently (39% of the cells) visible simultaneously at the tip of the bud and at the neck between mother and daughter cells (Figure 2F). To investigate whether secretion in these cells occurred simultaneously at both bud tip and neck, we performed cell wall labeling with TRITC-Con A and examined by fluorescence microscopy where newly synthesized cell wall material was deposited after a growth period in the absence of TRITC-Con A. The incorporation of newly synthesized cell wall material, as indicated by the absence of TRITC-Con A fluorescence, was only detected at the bud tip (our unpublished observations), suggesting that growth preferentially occurred at this site. The method used, however, may not have been sensitive enough to detect smaller amounts of secretion occurring at the neck.
Accumulation of Vesicles in Sec10
C but Not in
Sec10CT-overexpressing Cells
An important question from the above data was whether the growth
defects of the dominant negative Sec10p mutants were due to blocks on
the exocytic pathway. Such a block would result in the accumulation of
secretory vesicles. To address this, we performed electron microscopy
on the dominant-negative Sec10p mutants and wild-type cells. In cells
overexpressing Sec10
C, vesicles accumulated (81 ± 31 vesicles/cell section, compared with 4 ± 2 for
wild-type)(Figure 3, C and D). In
small budded cells (Figure 3C), the vesicles were primarily
concentrated in the bud, but were also distributed randomly in the
mother cell. In large budded cells, vesicles accumulated approximately
equally in daughter and mother cell. However, vesicles in the bud
appeared more tightly concentrated in groups than they were in the
mother cell (Figure 3D). In summary, the data demonstrated that
overexpression of Sec10
C resulted in a block of the exocytic pathway.
|
In contrast, cells overexpressing the C-terminal region of Sec10p, Sec10CT, were largely devoid of vesicles (5 ± 2 vesicles/cell section) (Figure 3B). Since these cells did not accumulate any other forms of intracellular membranes, we assume that the slow growth of these cells was not due to a defect in vesicular traffic. Rather, the elongated shape of these cells suggested that exocytosis continued, but that the switch from bud tip growth to isotropic growth and subsequent cytokinesis was delayed.
Sec10
C and Sec10CT Are Synthetically Lethal with Different
Subsets of Exocytic Mutants
As an initial clue to the identification of interactive partners
of the Sec10 fragments, we searched for genetic interactions between
the dominant-negative Sec10 mutants and mutants in other genes of the
post-Golgi pathway (Table 2). Toward this
aim, the Sec10p domains were expressed in temperature-sensitive mutants of members of the exocyst (sec3-2, sec5-24,
sec6-4, sec8-9, sec10-2, sec15-1), of a t-SNARE (sec9-4), of a potential
SNARE-associated protein (sec1-1), of the Rab
(sec4-8), and of its nucleotide exchange protein
(sec2-41). The two dominant negative mutants of Sec10p displayed distinct patterns of genetic interactions. Expression of
Sec10
C resulted in cell death at 25°C exclusively with mutants of
the exocyst, namely sec3-2, sec5-24, sec6-4,
sec10-2, and sec15-1. On the other hand,
overexpression of Sec10CT was synthetically lethal with a mutant of the
t-SNARE, sec9-4, a mutant of the potentially SNARE-interacting protein Sec1p, as well as with the exocyst mutants, sec6-4, sec8-9, and sec15-1.
Somewhat weaker synthetic effects were found with sec4-8.
In conclusion, Sec10
C genetically interacts exclusively with members
of the exocyst; in contrast, Sec10CT interacts with components of the
SNARE apparatus and a subset of the exocyst proteins.
|
Sec10
C Physically Interacts with Sec15p
Given the different effects of the Sec10p fragments on cell
morphology and their distinct patterns of genetic interactions, we
examined whether the Sec10p fragments would bind to different partners.
We have investigated the interactions of Sec10
C and Sec10CT with
other members of the exocyst by using in vitro synthesized [35S]-methionine/cysteine-labeled proteins. The proteins
to be tested for interaction were cotranslated, and the reaction
mixture was subjected to immunoprecipitation using a c-myc
tag, which had been added to the protein sequence of Sec10
C and
Sec10CT. To test a direct interaction between the two different Sec10p
domains themselves, c-myc-tagged Sec10
C and untagged
Sec10CT were used. The C-terminal fragment of Sec10p did not bind to
any other member of the exocyst tested in vitro, nor did it bind to the
Sec10
C fragment (our unpublished observations). However, we found an in vitro interaction between the Sec10
C fragment and Sec15p (Figure 4). Binding of Sec10
C to Sec15p was
almost stoichiometric.
|
Effect of the Dominant-Negative Sec10p Domains on the Composition of the Exocyst Complex
The composition of the exocyst complex is altered in
temperature-sensitive mutants of some of its members
(sec3-2, sec5-24, sec15-1, and
sec10-2) (TerBush et al., 1995
). Since different mutants cause the loss of different subunits from the complex, important clues can be deduced about the structural interactions within
the complex. We have, therefore, examined the effects of the
dominant-negative Sec10p mutants on the composition of the exocyst
complex. Strains carrying a c-myc3-tagged
SEC8 allele, as well as expressing Sec10
C or Sec10CT
under the control of the inducible GAL1 promotor, were
induced for overexpression of the Sec10p fragments and then
metabolically labeled with [35S]-cysteine and
-methionine. Sec8p and associated proteins were retrieved from lysates
by precipitation with anti-c-myc antibody, and labeled
proteins were visualized by autoradioagraphy (Figure 5A). While overexpression of Sec10
C
displaced full-length Sec10p from the complex, no other subunits were
displaced, although a slight reduction in the level of Sec6p and Sec15p
was noted. The composition was not altered when the Sec10CT was
overexpressed (Figure 5A). As a marker for the position of Sec10p in
the immunoprecipitates, an immunoprecipitate from a strain
overexpressing full-length Sec10p was used. When Sec10p and Sec15p were
cotranscribed and translated in vitro, Sec15p could be coprecipitated
with Sec10p (Figure 5B). Addition of GST-Sec10
C, but not GST alone,
was able to displace Sec15p from full-length Sec10p.
|
Based on these results, we suggest that, in Sec10
C-overexpressing
cells, the growth defect and the accumulation of vesicles are due to
the loss of endogenous Sec10p from the exocyst complex, possibly by
competition for binding to Sec15p. On the other hand, Sec10CT does not
appear to exert its effect on cell function by interacting with the
other components of the exocyst complex. The presence of a complete
exocyst complex is in agreement with the lack of vesicle accumulation
seen in cells overexpressing Sec10CT. Furthermore it is in agreement
with the failure of Sec10CT to bind in vitro to other components of the
exocyst.
The Effects of Co-overexpression of Sec15p and Fragments of Sec10p
Given the binding of Sec10
C to Sec15p, we investigated the
functional interaction of Sec10p and Sec15p in vivo. The overexpression of Sec15p alone results in growth inhibition and the accumulation of
vesicles (Salminen and Novick, 1989
). Many of the vesicles accumulate
in the form of a tight cluster, which is distinct from the pattern of
vesicle accumulation seen in temperature-sensitive post-Golgi
sec mutants such as sec1-1 or
sec6-4. When we compared the growth of yeast coexpressing
Sec10
C and Sec15p with the growth of strains expressing each protein
alone, we noticed a synergistic negative effect on growth rate (our
unpublished observations). Cells co-overexpressing Sec10CT and Sec15p,
however, had the same approximate growth rate of cells overexpressing
Sec10CT alone (our unpublished observations). However, when examined by
light microscopy, these cells no longer appeared elongated like the cells overexpressing Sec10CT alone, implying that co-overexpression of
Sec15p modifies the Sec10CT phenotype (Figure
6).
|
Sec15p and Sec4p Colocalize upon Sec15p Overexpression
When Sec15p is overexpressed, it can be localized by
immunofluorescence as a patch in the vicinity of the bud tip or
sometimes in the neck region of small budded cells, whereas the normal
level of Sec15p in wild-type cells is not detectable (Salminen and
Novick, 1989
). In cells overexpressing Sec15p, Sec4p is localized in
regions similar to Sec15p. We investigated the potential colocalization of Sec15p and Sec4p in cells overexpressing Sec15p (Figure 6). Upon
overexpression of Sec15p, both Sec4p and Sec15p were detectable in a
bright spot that colocalized in the majority of the cells (64%
colocalization). Some cells, however, could not be stained by Sec15p
antibody, although a distinct patch of Sec4p was visible (Figure 6, C
and D). Yet, whenever Sec15p and Sec4p are detected within the same
cell, they colocalize. These patches of Sec4p and Sec15p most likely
correspond to the vesicle clusters seen by electron microscopy in
Sec15p-overexpressing cells (Salminen and Novick, 1989
).
We next used the formation of the Sec4p/Sec15p patch as an assay by
which to further examine the potential function of the Sec10p domains.
In particular, we were interested to determine whether the
overexpression of either of the Sec10p domains would cause a change in
the formation of the Sec15p patch. Prior studies demonstrated that
formation of the Sec15 patch requires the function of the GTPase Sec4p
and its exchange protein Sec2p (Salminen and Novick, 1989
). In cells
co-overexpressing Sec15p and the Sec10CT, we noticed that Sec15p
colocalized with Sec4p in 64% of cells (Figure 6, G and H), and the
morphology of these cells was similar to that of wild-type cells. Thus,
while the coexpression of Sec10CT and Sec15p prevents the formation of
elongated cells, typical of Sec10CT expression, it does not prevent the
formation of the Sec15p/Sec4p patch, typical of Sec15p overexpression.
In contrast, when Sec15p and Sec10
C were co-overexpressed, the patch
of Sec15p staining was no longer visible (Figure 6F). Given that
Sec10
C binds to Sec15p, we speculated that the Sec10
C may be
recruited to the site of the Sec15p patch and that the lack of Sec15p
fluorescence in the Sec10
C/Sec15p co-overexpressing cells was due to
the masking of the epitope by Sec10
C. In this case we would expect
to see colocalization of Sec4p and Sec10
C by immunofluorescence. As
shown in Figure 7, double labeling with monoclonal Sec4p antibody and polyclonal Sec10p antibody demonstrated colocalization in distinct patches in the cell (Figure 7, E and F). As
in the case of the Sec15p staining, not all the cells showed staining
with both Sec4p and Sec10p antibodies (79% colocalization). It seems
most likely that Sec10
C is recruited to the site of Sec15p
localization and thus masks the epitope for the Sec15p antibody. Since
the antibody used recognizes both endogenous Sec10p, as well as the
Sec10
C fragment, it was important to verify that the patches
observed with this antibody upon Sec10
C expression correspond to
concentrations of Sec10
C and not the full-length protein. As shown
in Figure 7C, the immunofluorescence is more intense, when Sec10
C
was overexpressed compared with wild-type cells, where only the
endogenous Sec10p was recognized (Figure 7A). This suggests that the
patch stained with Sec10p antibody in the Sec15p/Sec10
C
co-overexpressors predominantly reflects the presence of Sec10
C,
although we cannot rule out that endogenous Sec10p was also
recruited to the site of Sec4p colocalization. Since we did not observe
a concentration of Sec10p staining in cells overexpressing Sec15p alone
(our unpublished observations), it seems that most of Sec10p is not
recruited into a patch, in this situation. Also, as shown in Figure 7,
C and D, overexpression of Sec10
C alone did not result in the
colocalization of Sec4p and Sec10
C. Sec10
C was distributed
throughout the cells. Thus, Sec15p has the ability to colocalize with
Sec4p in a patch when overexpressed, and Sec10
C can become
incorporated into these patches through its interaction with Sec15p.
|
To extend this line of investigation, we used electron microscopy to
examine the ultrastructure of yeast co-overexpressing Sec15p with
either of the Sec10 fragments to assay for the formation of vesicle
clusters (Figure 8). Cells
co-overexpressing Sec10
C and Sec15p (Figure 8B) contained a
comparable number of vesicles (170 ± 23 vesicles/cell section) as
cells overexpressing Sec15p alone (160 ± 123 vesicles/cell
section) (Figure 8A). Frequently, cells accumulated additional
membranes such as Golgi and endoplasmic reticulum. The severe
constitutive block in post-Golgi transport may lead to the accumulation
of membrane at earlier stages of the secretory pathway. Vesicles in
these cells often appeared in clusters similar to those in
Sec15p-overexpressing cells (Figure 8B). The binding of Sec10
C to
Sec15p did not appear to interfere with the ability of Sec15p to
cluster vesicles.
|
We also analyzed the extent of vesicle accumulation in cells co-overexpressing Sec10CT and Sec15p. However, somewhat fewer vesicles were present (52 ± 17 vesicles/cell section) than when Sec15p alone was overexpressed (160 ± 123 vesicles/cell section) (Figure 8C). While a minor fraction of cells did show a vesicle cluster (our unpublished observations), such clusters were generally less prominent (as in Figure 8C). In contrast, overexpression of Sec10CT alone caused an elongated cell shape without any accumulation of vesicles (5 ± 2 vesicles/cell section). The phenotypic interaction of Sec15p and Sec10CT may not result from a direct interaction of Sec10CT and Sec15p, but from the counterbalancing of two opposing effects on the cell. Overexpression of Sec15p may, by inhibiting the secretory pathway, prevent the formation of elongated cells, while overexpression of Sec10CT may, by slowing the growth rate of the cells, limit the accumulation of vesicles.
Myo2p Colocalizes with Sec4p
Both actin and the class V unconventional myosin, Myo2p, have been
implicated in the targeting of vesicles. To explore the possibility of
the presence of components of the cytoskeleton in the vesicle cluster
formed in response to Sec15p overexpression, we performed double
labeling with Sec4p and actin or Sec4p and Myo2p antibodies. The
localization of Sec4p was taken as a reference point for the formation
of the vesicle cluster. Similar to the situation in wild-type cells,
actin and Sec4p, although generally present in similar regions of the
cell, never colocalized exactly (our unpublished observations). Some
overlap of localization was observed, particularly in large budded
cells overexpressing Sec15p. In these cells, Sec15p was frequently
found in the neck region between mother and daughter cells as was
actin. Yet even in these situations, the colocalization was still only
partial. The additional overexpression of Sec10
C or Sec10CT did not
further alter the pattern of actin localization.
The class V unconventional myosin, Myo2p, has been localized to the
sites of exocytosis in yeast (Lillie and Brown, 1994
). Furthermore, the
temperature-sensitive mutant, myo2-66, leads to an
accumulation of vesicles, clearly showing a connection between this
myosin and exocytosis (Govindan et al., 1995
). In wild-type cells, Myo2p and Sec4p did colocalize in the bud tip and at the neck
between mother and daughter cells (Figure
9, A and B). The additional punctate
cytoplasmic staining of Myo2p, which had also been previously reported
(Lillie and Brown, 1994
), did not colocalize with Sec4p. In cells
overexpressing Sec15p, Myo2p remained, in many cases, colocalized with
Sec4p staining in patches (Figure 9, C and D). Sec15p, therefore,
seemed to be able to also mislocalize Myo2p together with Sec4p.
However, not all cells displayed Myo2p staining, and when multiple
spots of Sec4p were present in a single cell, only the ones with the
highest intensity of Sec4p staining would costain for Myo2p. The
additional overexpression of Sec10p fragments did not alter Sec4p and
Myo2p colocalization (Figure 9, E-H). By extrapolation, we conclude
that Myo2p also colocalizes with Sec15p in this patch.
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
All of the components of the yeast exocyst complex have recently
been identified (TerBush et al., 1996
), and a similar
protein complex has been purified from brain (Hsu et al.,
1996
). A number of lines of evidence indicate that the exocyst
functions to specify sites on the plasma membrane for the docking and
fusion of secretory vesicles. However, the specific functions of the
individual subunits have remained unknown. In this study we have
generated dominant-negative mutants of Sec10p to examine the potential
functions of this exocyst component and have used these
dominant-negative Sec10p constructs to investigate the relationship of
Sec10p to the exocyst complex.
The Sec10p dominant-negative constructs were based on analysis of the
hydrophilicity of the amino acid sequence as well as the regions of
homology between Sec10p and its homologues in C. elegans and
mammals. Overexpression of either the amino-terminal two-thirds
(Sec10
C) or the carboxy-terminal region (Sec10CT) resulted in the
inhibition of cell growth. The effects of Sec10
C and Sec10CT
overexpression on cell morphology, however, were strikingly distinct
(see Table 3 for summary). Expression of
Sec10
C causes an accumulation of post-Golgi vesicles indicating a
block in exocytosis. In these cells, the endogenous Sec10p is missing
from the exocyst complex, but all other subunits are present. The high
concentration of Sec10
C may competitively inhibit the binding of
full-length Sec10p to the complex. Sec10
C is apparently lost from
the complex during the extensive washing necessary for
immunopurification. We suggest, therefore, that the incorporation of
Sec10p into the exocyst is essential for normal exocytosis and cell
growth. In cells overexpressing Sec10
C, the incomplete composition
of the exocyst complex may be the cause for the block in exocytosis and the accumulation of vesicles.
|
We have identified Sec15p as an interactive partner of Sec10
C. Prior
studies have shown that overexpression of Sec15p leads to growth
inhibition, the formation of a patch of Sec15p, and the accumulation of
a cluster of secretory vesicles. Sec15p appears to respond to activated
Sec4p, since mutations in either Sec4p or in its nucleotide exchange
protein, Sec2p, block patch formation (Salminen and Novick, 1989
), and
we have shown here that the patch of Sec15p colocalizes with Sec4p, a
marker for secretory vesicles. To help establish the relationship of
Sec10p to Sec4p and Sec15p, we explored the effects of
co-overexpression of Sec15p and Sec10p fragments. We have shown that
Sec10
C is recruited to the Sec4p vesicle patch formed upon
overexpression of Sec15p. These data suggest that Sec15p has an innate
ability to cluster vesicles that is not interrupted by the binding of
Sec10
C to Sec15p. We have further shown that Myo2p is found together
with Sec4p and Sec15p in this patch structure. Recently, the brain
homologue of Myo2p, myosin V, was reported to reside on synaptic
vesicles (Prekeris and Terrian, 1997
). The potential interaction of
Myo2p with vesicles is consistent with its colocalization with Sec4p and Sec15p in the patch.
While overexpression of Sec10CT did cause growth inhibition, it did not result in a block in exocytosis as revealed by the absence of vesicle accumulation (see Table 3 for summary). Furthermore, Sec10CT was not observed to physically interact with any component of the exocyst, and expression of Sec10CT did not alter the subunit composition of the complex. However, overexpression of Sec10CT did result in an elongated cell phenotype. In wild-type cells, secretion during cell cycle progression is initially restricted to a region at the tip of the bud, becomes isotropic as the bud becomes larger, and then finally relocates to the neck region for the formation of the septum between mother and daughter cell. The reorientation of vesicular traffic from the tip of the bud may be disturbed or delayed by Sec10CT overexpression. We suggest, therefore, that Sec10CT may interact with a protein that mediates the reorientation of secretion during cell cycle progression. By binding to such a protein, Sec10CT may block the interaction with full-length Sec10p and thereby block the reorientation of the secretory machinery from the bud tip, resulting in the formation of elongated cells. Sec10p appears to play an important role functioning at the interface of the secretory pathway with the morphogenetic machinery.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We would like to thank Fern Finger and Christiane Walch-Solimena for invaluable help with immunofluorescence and electron microscopy, Linda Cichione for thin sectioning, and Laurie Daniels and Kohji Takei for helpful assistance with electron microscopy. Furthermore, we are grateful to Samara Reck-Peterson for the generous gift of anti-Myo2 antibody. We also thank Pietro DeCamilli for helpful discussions and Chavelar Carr and Fern Finger for critical reading of the manuscript. D.R. was supported by a fellowship from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and W.G. was supported by Brown-Cox and National Institutes of Health fellowships. This work was supported by grant GM-35370 from the National Institutes of Health (to P.N.).
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Present address: Max-Planck Institute for Brain Research, Department of Neurochemistry, Deutschordenstr. 46, 60528 Frankfurt, Germany.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. Prigent, T. Dubois, G. Raposo, V. Derrien, D. Tenza, C. Rosse, J. Camonis, and P. Chavrier ARF6 controls post-endocytic recycling through its downstream exocyst complex effector J. Cell Biol., December 8, 2003; 163(5): 1111 - 1121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. E. Vega and S.-C. Hsu The Exocyst Complex Associates with Microtubules to Mediate Vesicle Targeting and Neurite Outgrowth J. Neurosci., June 1, 2001; 21(11): 3839 - 3848. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Patki, J. Buxton, A. Chawla, L. Lifshitz, K. Fogarty, W. Carrington, R. Tuft, and S. Corvera Insulin Action on GLUT4 Traffic Visualized in Single 3T3-L1 Adipocytes by Using Ultra-fast Microscopy Mol. Biol. Cell, January 1, 2001; 12(1): 129 - 141. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
J. H. Lipschutz, W. Guo, L. E. O'Brien, Y. H. Nguyen, P. Novick, and K. E. Mostov Exocyst Is Involved in Cystogenesis and Tubulogenesis and Acts by Modulating Synthesis and Delivery of Basolateral Plasma Membrane and Secretory Proteins Mol. Biol. Cell, December 1, 2000; 11(12): 4259 - 4275. [Abstract] [Full Text] |