| Literature DB >> 12163472 |
Andrei V Nikonov1, Erik Snapp, Jennifer Lippincott-Schwartz, Gert Kreibich.
Abstract
In the ER, the translocon complex (TC) functions in the translocation and cotranslational modification of proteins made on membrane-bound ribosomes. The oligosaccharyltransferase (Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2002 PMID: 12163472 PMCID: PMC2173836 DOI: 10.1083/jcb.200201116
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cell Biol ISSN: 0021-9525 Impact factor: 10.539
Figure 1.Characterization of clones stably expressing GFP–Dad1 that is functionally incorporated into the OST. (a) Isolated clones express different levels of GFP–Dad1 and respond differently to the inducer. Permanently transfected clones isolated after antibiotic and nonpermissive temperature selection were grown in the absence (−) and presence (+) of the inducer. Equal protein amounts of total cell lysates were analyzed on Western blots using an anti-GFP pAb. (b) In clone M3/18, the expression level of GFP–Dad1 is comparable to that of endogenous Dad1. Equal amounts of protein from total lysates of cells grown at the permissive or nonpermissive temperature were analyzed on Western blots using an anti-Dad1 pAb. Lane 1, BHK-21 cells grown at 34°C; lane 2, tsBN7 cells grown at 34°C; lane 3, M3/18 cells grown at 34°C and lane 4, M3/18 cells grown at 39.5°C. An asterisk marks the position of GFP–Dad1 protein and the position of endogenous Dad1 is marked by a double asterisk. (c) N-glycosylation activity of OST is repaired in M3/18 cells grown at 39.5°C. Three different cell lines transiently expressing SEAP were grown at 34 or 39.5°C and labeled with [35S]-TransLabel. The cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-SEAP pAb. The precipitates were digested with EndoH (+) or left as untreated control (−). The EndoH-resistant form of SEAP is represented by upper most band (arrow 1), the EndoH-sensitive form of SEAP is a band in the middle (arrow 2), and the nonglycosylated form of SEAP is represented by lower band (arrow 3).
Figure 2.GFP–Dad1 expressed in clone M3/18 clone is located in the ER. M3/18 cell grown at 39.5°C were fixed in paraformaldehyde and permeabilized with Triton X-100. The cells were stained with primary pAbs against Sec61β (a) or βCOPI (d) and secondary antibodies were tagged with Texas red. Immunofluorescence micrographs were obtained with the LSM510 confocal microscope using the helium-neon laser. To localize GFP–Dad1 the argon-krypton laser was used (b and e). The merged images show that GFP–Dad1 is colocalized with Sec61β (c) and not with βCOPI (f). (g) GFP–Dad1 cofractionates with TC components. Postnuclear supernatants obtained from BHK-21 or M3/18 cells were fractionated on a Nycodenz gradient and equal aliquots were subjected to Western blot analysis using pAbs directed against the ER or ERGIC markers indicated next to the arrows marking the position of the respective proteins on the blots. The fractions containing Golgi and ERGIC or ER-derived membranes are indicated (GA or ER, respectively). GFP–Dad1 is only found in a fraction close to the bottom (B) of the gradient, which contains also other TC components. ERGICp53 is found exclusively in LZ and the two fractions next to the top (T) of the gradient.
Figure 3.In detergent extracts from M3/18 cells grown at the nonpermissive temperature GFP–Dad1 cosediments in a glycerol gradient with the other subunits of the OST complex. M3/18 cells grown at 39.5°C were solubilized with 1.5% of digitonin in the presence of 0.5 M NaCl. The total cell lysate (T) was clarified by differential centrifugation obtaining a supernatant (S) and a pellet fraction (P). An aliquot (0.85 ml) of the supernatant fraction was layered onto a glycerol gradient (8%-30%) and after centrifugation (151,200 g for 15.5 h) the gradient was fractionated into ten 1.15-ml fractions and the LZ. Equal aliquots of the gradient fractions, the pellet formed during centrifugation (GP) as well as molecular weight markers (M) were analyzed by SDS-PAGE. The proteins on the gel were either stained with Coomassie blue (a) or transferred onto a nitrocellulose membrane and probed by Western blotting with pAbs against Dad1, RII and Sec61β (b). At the experimental conditions chosen, the OST complex (GFP–Dad1 and RII) and the Sec61 complex (Sec61β) do not cosediment. (c) In a similar experiment, tsBN7 cells transiently overexpressing GFP–Dad1 and grown at 34°C (tsBN7/pGFPDad1) were solubilized with digitonin and analyzed by Western blotting as described above. Using pAb against Dad1 to localize Dad1 and GFP–Dad1 on the glycerol gradient it is apparent, that most of the overexpressed GFP–Dad1 was not incorporated into the OST.
Figure 4.Analysis of FRAP experiments by different methods. (a) tsBN7 cells transiently expressing LBR-GFP, as well as M3/18 cells kept untreated or treated with puromycin were subjected to FRAP analysis. Images were obtained before (prebleach) and after photobleaching at the indicated time points. Arrows indicate the positions of the bleached areas. The FRAP experiments were performed with wide-open pinhole to ensure that the fluorescence is collected from the entire depth of the cell. Therefore, the finest structural features of the ER (like those seen in Fig. 2, a–f) are not resolved. (b) Graphic representation of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching data. Recovery of fluorescence in the bleached box is very slow in M3/18 cells grown at 39.5°C (blue line with solid circles). If the cells are treated with puromycin (100 μM for 15 min), recovery of fluorescence in the bleached box occurs more rapidly (green line with solid squares) but still it is not as fast as that of the LBR-GFP construct expressed in tsBN7 cells (red line with solid diamonds). (c) Calculation of diffusion constants using the simulation program. Prebleach and postbleach images (like those presented in Fig. 3 a) recorded during FRAP experiments were analyzed by the simulation program described earlier (Siggia et al., 2000). The program produces a fluorescence recovery curve based on the experimental data (red solid line) and tries to fit it to a theoretical or simulated fluorescence recovery curve (blue broken line). If two curves are fitted, the simulation program calculates the diffusion constant.
The lateral mobility of GFP-tagged fusion proteins stably expressed in M3/18 or transiently expressed in tsBN7 cells
| Cell line | Construct | Growth temperature | Treatment | Diffusion constant | Mobile fraction |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M3/18 | GFP–Dad1 | 39.5°C | – | 0.049 ± 0.010 | 87.9 ± 7.4 | 18 |
| Cycloheximide | 0.044 ± 0.013 | 89.6 ± 8.1 | 8 | |||
| NaCl | 0.251 ± 0.071 | 94.5 ± 5.6 | 5 | |||
| Puromycin | 0.131 ± 0.058 | 89.4 ± 5.7 | 25 | |||
| Tunicamycin | 0.048 ± 0.016 | 89.1 ± 2.5 | 10 | |||
| tsBN7 | LBR–GFP | 34°C | – | 0.331 ± 0.054 | 99.6 ± 5.2 | 4 |
| NaCl | 0.328 ± 0.032 | 97.8 ± 1.3 | 9 | |||
| Puromycin | 0.335 ± 0.029 | 96.3 ± 3.6 | 7 | |||
| 39.5°C | – | 0.331 ± 0.031 | 89.6 ± 2.9 | 8 | ||
| Dad1–GFP | 34°C | – | 0.315 ± 0.064 | 93.3 ± 5.2 | 7 | |
| 39.5°C | – | NA | NA | 15 | ||
| 34°C | – | 0.178 ± 0.037 | 89.5 ± 5.9 | 10 | ||
| GFP–Dad1 | 39.5°C | – | 0.140 ± 0.024 | 88.9 ± 1.9 | 10 |
Means ± SD denotes standard deviation of values for D eff and M f for recovery of fluorescence after photobleaching. The cells were grown overnight in glass-bottomed dishes for cell culture and pretreated as indicated with cycloheximide (80 μM for 30 min), NaCl (an extra 150 mM for 10 min), puromycin (100 μM for 15 min), or tunicamycin (1 μg/ml for 4 h) before the FRAP experiments. NA denotes that no reliable data were obtained (see Results for details).