Ella R Hinson1, Peter Cresswell. 1. Section of Microbial Pathogenesis, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8011, USA.
Abstract
Viperin is an evolutionarily conserved interferon-inducible protein that localizes to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and inhibits a number of DNA and RNA viruses. In this study, we report that viperin specifically localizes to the cytoplasmic face of the ER and that an amphipathic alpha-helix at its N terminus is necessary for the ER localization of viperin and sufficient to promote ER localization of a reporter protein, dsRed. Overexpression of intact viperin but not the amphipathic alpha-helix fused to dsRed induced crystalloid ER. Consistent with other proteins that induce crystalloid ER, viperin self-associates, and it does so independently of the amphipathic alpha-helix. Viperin expression also affected the transport of soluble but not membrane-associated proteins. Expression of intact viperin or an N-terminal alpha-helix-dsRed fusion protein significantly reduced secretion of soluble alkaline phosphatase and reduced its rate of ER-to-Golgi trafficking. Similarly, viperin expression inhibited bulk protein secretion and secretion of endogenous alpha(1)-antitrypsin and serum albumin from HepG2 cells. Converting hydrophobic residues in the N-terminal alpha-helix to acidic residues partially or completely restored normal transport of soluble alkaline phosphatase, suggesting that the extended amphipathic nature of the N-terminal alpha-helical domain is essential for inhibiting protein secretion.
Viperin is an evolutionarily conserved interferon-inducible protein that localizes to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and inhibits a number of DNA and RNA viruses. In this study, we report that viperin specifically localizes to the cytoplasmic face of the ER and that an amphipathic alpha-helix at its N terminus is necessary for the ER localization of viperin and sufficient to promote ER localization of a reporter protein, dsRed. Overexpression of intact viperin but not the amphipathic alpha-helix fused to dsRed induced crystalloid ER. Consistent with other proteins that induce crystalloid ER, viperin self-associates, and it does so independently of the amphipathic alpha-helix. Viperinexpression also affected the transport of soluble but not membrane-associated proteins. Expression of intact viperin or an N-terminal alpha-helix-dsRed fusion protein significantly reduced secretion of soluble alkaline phosphatase and reduced its rate of ER-to-Golgi trafficking. Similarly, viperinexpression inhibited bulk protein secretion and secretion of endogenous alpha(1)-antitrypsin and serum albumin from HepG2 cells. Converting hydrophobic residues in the N-terminal alpha-helix to acidic residues partially or completely restored normal transport of soluble alkaline phosphatase, suggesting that the extended amphipathic nature of the N-terminal alpha-helical domain is essential for inhibiting protein secretion.
Type I interferons are the first line of defense against viral infections.
The significance of the interferon pathway is illustrated by the
susceptibility of interferon signaling mutants to infection and by viral
mechanisms that counteract this pathway
(1,
2). Although many genes are
induced upon interferon stimulation, very few of these genes have been
functionally characterized. Viperin is highly induced by both Type I and II
interferons and has a broad range of antiviral activity, inhibiting DNA
viruses, notably human cytomegalovirus
(3); RNA viruses such as
influenza, hepatitis C virus
(HCV),2 and
alphaviruses
(4-6);
and retroviruses such as human immunodeficiency virus
(7). Upon expression, viperin
localizes to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), where it interacts with
farnesyl-diphosphate synthase, an enzyme involved in lipid biosynthesis. This
interaction appears to result in the disruption of lipid raft microdomains and
prevention of influenza virus from budding from the plasma membrane
(4).Although recent studies have explored the antiviral functions of viperin,
the general biochemical properties of this protein remain largely undefined.
Viperin is highly conserved across both mammals and lower vertebrates and
shares homology with the MoaA family of “radical
S-adenosylmethionine” enzymes that bind Fe-S clusters
(3,
8). In addition to a putative
Fe-S cluster-binding domain, viperin has a 42-amino acid residue N-terminal
amphipathic α-helix, and similar domains in other proteins have been
shown to bind membranes and induce membrane curvature
(9,
10).In this study, we examined the role of the viperin N-terminal
α-helical domain in both cellular localization and ER membrane
morphology and analyzed the biochemical properties of viperin. We discovered
that viperin forms dimers and induces a tightly ordered, visually striking
array of ER membranes, known as crystalloid
ER(11-13),
upon overexpression. In addition, viperinexpression impedes the secretion of
a variety of soluble proteins. Although the N-terminal amphipathic
α-helix is not sufficient to induce crystalloid ER formation, it is both
necessary and sufficient to mediate ER localization and to inhibit protein
secretion.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Cells, Antibodies, and Constructs—HepG2, HeLa, and 293T
cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 5%
bovinecalf serum. The following antibodies were purchased commercially:
anti-placental alkaline phosphatase (ab11299),
anti-α1-antitrypsin (ab7633), anti-human serum albumin
(ab18079), and anti-Myc (ab9106) (Abcam) and anti-hemagglutinin (HA) tag
(HA.11; Covance). MaP.VIP and rabbit anti-calnexin antibody
(4) and the mouse anti-tapasin
monoclonal antibody PaSta1(14)
were described previously. Goat anti-rabbit and anti-mouse Ig secondary
antibodies were purchased commercially from Molecular Probes. All viperin
constructs were generated by PCR amplification and then cloned into pcDNA3.1.
The dsRed gene cassette was excised from pDsRed-Monomer (Clontech) using
restriction enzyme digestion and then cloned into pcDNA3.1 with or without
residues 1-42 of viperin. The pRSVPAP construct, which encodes placental
alkaline phosphatase, was purchased from American Type Culture Collection. The
construct encoding TAP1 (transporter associated with
antigen processing subunit 1) fused to Cherry
at its C terminus was a kind gift from Dr. David Stepensky (Ben-Gurion
University, Beersheba, Israel). Constructs encoding secreted alkaline
phosphatase (SeAP) and Sar1 and Arf1 dominant negatives were kind gifts from
Dr. Jon Kagan (Harvard University). The expression construct encoding the
vesicular stomatitis virus glycoprotein temperature-sensitive ts045 mutant
(15) was provided by Dr.
Jennifer Lippincott-Schwartz (National Institutes of Health).Transfection—Cells were transiently transfected using
Lipofectamine 2000 (Invitrogen) following the manufacturer's instructions.Western Blotting—Cells were harvested, washed once in
phosphate-buffered saline, and lysed in 1% Triton X-100 in Tris-buffered
saline (0.15 m NaCl and 0.01 m Tris, pH 7.4) containing
a protease inhibitor mixture (Roche Applied Science). Whole cell lysates were
separated by SDS-PAGE, transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes
(Millipore), and then probed with the indicated antibodies.Immunofluorescence—HeLa cells or 293T cells transiently
expressing wild-type (WT) viperin, viperin lacking the N-terminal amphipathic
α-helix (viperin-(Δ1-42)), or viperin bearing mutations in the
α-helix were plated onto glass coverslips. Forty-eight hours
post-transfection, the cells were fixed in 4% formaldehyde, washed,
permeabilized with 0.05% saponin or 0.1% Triton X-100, and stained with the
indicated antibodies. For selective plasma membrane permeabilization, cells
were treated with 22 μg/ml streptolysin O (Aalto) in the presence of 0.3
mm dithiothreitol for 15 min on ice, washed in intracellular
transport buffer (50 mm HEPES, 78 mm KCl, 4
mm MgCl2, 8.37 mm CaCl2, and 10
mm EGTA), and incubated for 5 min at 37 °C. After
permeabilization, cells were fixed in 4% formaldehyde and then stained with
the indicated antibodies in intracellular transport buffer.Electron Microscopy—293T cells transiently expressing the
vector control, WT viperin, or viperin-(1-42)-dsRed were examined by electron
microscopy as described previously
(4). For immunoelectron
microscopy, cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde (Electron Microscopy
Sciences) in 0.25 m HEPES, pH 7.4, for 1 h at room temperature and
then in 8% paraformaldehyde in 0.25 m HEPES, pH 7.4, overnight at 4
°C. Samples were prepared for immunochemistry as described previously
(16) and stained with MaP.VIP
and 10 nm of protein A-gold (Cell Microscopy Center, Utrecht University, The
Netherlands). Sections were examined with a Tecnai 12 Biotwin electron
microscope, and images were captured using a charge-coupled device camera
(Morada, Olympus).SeAP Assay—293T cells were cotransfected with SeAP and the
indicated viperin constructs. Twenty-four hours post-transfection, cell
supernatants were harvested and analyzed for SeAP secretion by an alkaline
phosphatase assay using the Phospha-Light system (Applied Biosystems) and a
luminometer.Radiolabeling and Pulse-Chase Analysis—Transiently
transfected 293T cells or HepG2 cells were harvested, washed once in
phosphate-buffered saline, and starved for 1 h in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's
medium without methionine or cysteine (Sigma) containing 3% dialyzed fetal
bovine serum. Cells were labeled for the indicated times with
[35S]methionine (PerkinElmer Life Sciences) and then chased with
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 10% bovinecalf serum and excess
methionine and cysteine. Cells and supernatants were harvested at the
indicated times and stored at -20 °C until detergent lysis.Immunoprecipitation—Cells were lysed in 1% Triton X-100 in
Tris-buffered saline containing protease inhibitors for 30 min on ice. For
radiolabeled cells, extracts were precleared with protein G-Sepharose (GE
Healthcare) and normal rabbit serum and then immunoprecipitated with the
indicated antibodies and protein G-Sepharose. Immunoprecipitates were washed,
eluted in reducing sample buffer, run on SDS-polyacrylamide gels, dried, and
exposed to PhosphorImager screens for quantification with ImageQuant software.
For viperin co-immunoprecipitations, cell extracts were precleared with
protein G-Sepharose, immunoprecipitated with anti-HA or control antibody, and
then blotted with anti-Myc antibody.
RESULTS
The N-terminal Amphipathic α-Helix Is Necessary and
Sufficient to Localize Viperin to the Cytoplasmic Face of the
ER—Although previous studies have shown that viperin localizes to
the ER, the precise topology and the ER localization signal of viperin were
not identified. To determine whether viperin localizes to the cytosolic or
lumenal face of the ER, we used streptolysin O to selectively permeabilize the
plasma membrane, followed by staining with the anti-viperin monoclonal
antibody MaP.VIP. An anti-tapasin antibody that recognizes a lumenal ER
epitope and an anti-calnexin antibody that recognizes a cytosolic epitope were
used as controls. Under these conditions, viperin and calnexin staining was
readily observed, whereas the ER lumenal epitope of tapasin was detected only
after saponin permeabilization (Fig.
1). This demonstrated that viperin was localized to the
cytosolic face of the ER. To identify the domain responsible, we focused on
the N-terminal α-helix because it has a wide hydrophobic face that is
characteristic of helices that not only bind to the ER but also induce
membrane curvature. First, to determine whether the α-helix is necessary
for ER localization, we used immunofluorescence to examine cells expressing WT
viperin or a deletion mutant lacking this domain (viperin-(Δ1-42)). WT
viperin colocalized with ER resident proteins, namely humanTAP1 fused to the
fluorescent protein tag Cherry and calnexin, but removing the α-helix
relocalized viperin to the cytosol (Fig.
1). Adding the N-terminal α-helix of viperin to
dsRed was also sufficient to relocalize this reporter protein from the cytosol
and nucleus to the ER (Fig.
1).
FIGURE 1.
Viperin localizes to the cytosolic face of the ER through its N-terminal
amphipathicα-helix. A, HeLa cells transiently
expressing viperin and tapasin were treated with streptolysin O (SLO)
to selectively permeabilize the plasma membrane or completely permeabilized
with saponin. Cells were stained with the anti-viperin monoclonal antibody
MaP.VIP and either an anti-tapasin antibody that recognizes a lumenal ER
epitope or an anti-calnexin antibody that recognizes a cytosolic epitope.
B, HeLa cells transiently expressing WT viperin or
viperin-(Δ1-42) were analyzed for colocalization with TAP1-Cherry and
endogenous calnexin. C, HeLa cells transiently expressing dsRed or
viperin-(1-42)-dsRed were analyzed for colocalization with calnexin.
Viperin Overexpression Induces Crystalloid ER—To confirm the
ER localization of viperin, we used immunoelectron microscopy to examine 293T
cells expressing viperin. We observed that these cells contained membranous
structures highly similar to previously described crystalloid ER,
characterized by the distortion of smooth ER membranes into a lattice-like
pattern (Fig. 2)
(12,
13,
17). However, the amphipathic
α-helix-dsRed fusion protein did not induce these morphological changes
(Fig. 2), indicating
that the α-helical domain is not sufficient to induce crystalloid ER.
Immunoelectron microscopy showed that viperin was highly concentrated in these
membranous areas in addition to normal ER
(Fig. 2). Further
analysis of viperin-expressing cells by immunofluorescence using Triton X-100
rather than saponin for permeabilization confirmed that expression of WT
viperin but not viperin-(Δ1-42) or the α-helix-dsRed fusion
protein induced dramatically distorted ER structures, defined by the presence
of calnexin (Fig.
2).
FIGURE 2.
Viperin expression distorts ER membranes. 293T cells transiently
expressing WT viperin or viperin-(1-42)-dsRed were analyzed by electron
microscopy (A) and by immunoelectron microscopy with MaP.VIP
(B) for viperin localization and ER membrane morphology. Scale
bar = 1 μm for vector and viperin-(1-42)-dsRed images and 500 nm for
WT images. 293T cells transiently expressing WT viperin,
viperin-(Δ1-42), or viperin-(1-42)-dsRed were analyzed by
immunofluorescence and co-stained with an antibody to the ER resident protein
calnexin to examine the formation of crystalloid ER (C).
Viperin localizes to the cytosolic face of the ER through its N-terminal
amphipathicα-helix. A, HeLa cells transiently
expressing viperin and tapasin were treated with streptolysin O (SLO)
to selectively permeabilize the plasma membrane or completely permeabilized
with saponin. Cells were stained with the anti-viperin monoclonal antibody
MaP.VIP and either an anti-tapasin antibody that recognizes a lumenal ER
epitope or an anti-calnexin antibody that recognizes a cytosolic epitope.
B, HeLa cells transiently expressing WT viperin or
viperin-(Δ1-42) were analyzed for colocalization with TAP1-Cherry and
endogenous calnexin. C, HeLa cells transiently expressing dsRed or
viperin-(1-42)-dsRed were analyzed for colocalization with calnexin.Viperinexpression distorts ER membranes. 293T cells transiently
expressing WT viperin or viperin-(1-42)-dsRed were analyzed by electron
microscopy (A) and by immunoelectron microscopy with MaP.VIP
(B) for viperin localization and ER membrane morphology. Scale
bar = 1 μm for vector and viperin-(1-42)-dsRed images and 500 nm for
WT images. 293T cells transiently expressing WT viperin,
viperin-(Δ1-42), or viperin-(1-42)-dsRed were analyzed by
immunofluorescence and co-stained with an antibody to the ER resident protein
calnexin to examine the formation of crystalloid ER (C).Viperin Forms Dimers Independently of the N-terminal Amphipathic
α-Helix—Proteins that induce crystalloid ER are often
dimeric (13), and we therefore
wished to determine whether viperin is capable of dimerization. Using Myc- and
HA-tagged viperinexpression vectors, we overexpressed these proteins in 293T
cells and performed co-immunoprecipitation studies on detergent extracts.
HA-tagged viperin co-immunoprecipitated with Myc-tagged viperin but not with a
Myc-tagged control protein, Rp14 (ribosomal protein
14) (Fig. 3). To
determine whether this self-interaction requires the N-terminal amphipathic
α-helix, we performed similar co-immunoprecipitations with HA- and
Myc-tagged viperin-(Δ1-42) truncation mutants. The viperin mutants were
also capable of self-association, indicating that viperin dimerization or
multimerization can occur independently of the amphipathic α-helical
domain (Fig. 3).
FIGURE 3.
Viperin self-interacts independently of the N-terminal amphipathic
α-helix. 293T cells were transiently transfected with HA- and
Myc-tagged WT viperin or viperin-(Δ1-42), lysed, and then examined by
Western blotting (WB) for protein expression and by
co-immunoprecipitation (IP) with a control or anti-HA antibody for
protein dimerization. Rp14-Myc served as a negative control, and Grp94 served
as a protein loading control.
The N-terminal Amphipathic α-Helix Is Necessary and
Sufficient to Inhibit Protein Secretion—To determine whether the
viperin-induced morphological changes affected ER function, we examined
protein trafficking in viperin-expressing cells. Viperinexpression in HepG2
cells caused a reduction in protein secretion, as measured by the amount of
35S-labeled proteins secreted into the supernatant normalized to
the total amount of 35S-labeled proteins in whole cell extracts.
Although expression of the green fluorescent protein control had no effect on
protein secretion relative to the vector control, viperinexpression reduced
total protein secretion from HepG2 cells to levels comparable with those
observed in cells expressing dominant-negative Sar1 and Arf1
(Fig. 4,
Sar1dn and Arf1dn) previously shown to dramatically affect
protein secretion (18,
19). By combining pulse-chase
analysis and immunoprecipitations from cell supernatants and extracts, we
specifically examined the secretion of endogenous albumin
(Fig. 4),
α1-antitrypsin (Fig.
4), and transferrin (data not shown) by
35S-labeled HepG2 cells and found that secretion of all three of
these soluble proteins was significantly reduced in viperin-expressing
cells.
FIGURE 4.
Viperin reduces protein secretion by HepG2 cells. A, HepG2
cells expressing the indicated proteins were radiolabeled with
[35S]methionine for 1 h and then chased for 2 h. The amount of
total 35S-labeled protein secreted into the supernatant was
normalized to the total amount of labeled proteins in cell extracts. Vector
and green fluorescent protein (GFP) served as negative controls,
whereas dominant-negative Sar1 (Sar1dn) and Arf1 (Arf1dn)
served as positive controls. The graph represents an average of three
independent experiments. B and C, HepG2 cells expressing
viperin or the vector control were [35S]methionine-labeled for 10
min and then chased for the indicated times. Supernatants and cell extracts
were immunoprecipitated (IP) with control antibodies (C) or
antibodies to albumin (B) or α1-antitrypsin
(α1AT)(C). Graphs on the right show the percent of
protein secreted normalized to the total amount of protein at time 0. These
results are representative of at least three independent experiments.
Viperin self-interacts independently of the N-terminal amphipathic
α-helix. 293T cells were transiently transfected with HA- and
Myc-tagged WT viperin or viperin-(Δ1-42), lysed, and then examined by
Western blotting (WB) for protein expression and by
co-immunoprecipitation (IP) with a control or anti-HA antibody for
protein dimerization. Rp14-Myc served as a negative control, and Grp94 served
as a protein loading control.To determine whether the reduction in protein secretion was a direct
consequence of crystalloid ER formation or a separate function associated with
the N-terminal amphipathic α-helix, we cotransfected various constructs
into 293T cells along with the secreted version of placental alkaline
phosphatase lacking the membrane anchor (SeAP)
(20). SeAP secretion was
assayed enzymatically, and intracellular transport was assessed using
pulse-chase radiolabeling, immunoprecipitation, and endoglycosidase H
digestion. The N-terminal amphipathic α-helix (amino acids 1-42) alone
was able to reduce SeAP secretion to levels comparable with WT viperin,
whereas secretion in cells expressing viperin-(Δ1-42) was comparable
with that in cells expressing the vector control or the control protein Rp14
(Fig. 5). Pulse-chase
analysis of SeAP showed that that the amphipathic α-helical domain was
both necessary and sufficient to inhibit the ER-to-Golgi trafficking of SeAP,
measured by the rate of acquisition of endoglycosidase H resistance
(Fig. 5).
Furthermore, the N-terminal amphipathic α-helix fused to monomeric dsRed
also inhibited SeAP secretion and significantly delayed the acquisition of
endoglycosidase H resistance compared with the vector control or dsRed alone
(Fig. 5, ).
FIGURE 5.
The N-terminal amphipathic α-helix of viperin is necessary
and sufficient to delay ER-to-Golgi trafficking of SeAP. A, 293T
cells were transiently transfected with SeAP and the indicated amounts of
viperin or control constructs and then analyzed for SeAP secretion 24 h
post-transfection. SeAP secretion is expressed as a percentage of the vector
control at 0.5 μg of transfected DNA. B, 293T cells transiently
expressing SeAP and the indicated constructs were
[35S]methionine-labeled for 10 min and then chased for the
indicated times. 293T cell detergent lysates were immunoprecipitated
(IP) with control (C) or anti-SeAP antibodies and then
treated with endoglycosidase H (Endo H). The graph shows the percent
of endoglycosidase H-resistant SeAP for each time point. C, SeAP
secretion was examined as described for A with the indicated
constructs. SeAP secretion is expressed as a percentage of the vector control
at 0.25 μg of transfected DNA. D, the acquisition of SeAP
endoglycosidase H resistance was examined as described for B with the
indicated constructs. Each experiment is representative of at least three
independent experiments.
Although viperinexpression affected the secretion of soluble proteins,
there was no discernible effect on the intracellular trafficking rates of
membrane-bound proteins. Using a temperature-sensitive variant of vesicular
stomatitis virus glycoprotein (ts045), we found that the rate at which
vesicular stomatitis virus glycoprotein arrived at the cell surface after
shifting to the permissive temperature was comparable in viperin-expressing
and control cells (supplemental Fig. 1A). Similarly, the rate at
which placental alkaline phosphatase (PLAP), the
glycosylphosphatidylinositol-anchored protein that is truncated before the
transmembrane domain to yield the soluble SeAP reporter
(20), arrived at the cell
surface was unaffected in viperin-expressing cells (supplemental Fig.
1B). However, transport was significantly delayed by expression of
the dominant-negative version of Sar1. Furthermore, viperinexpression did not
alter the ER-to-Golgi trafficking rates of vesicular stomatitis virus
glycoprotein (data not shown) or placental alkaline phosphatase, as measured
by the acquisition of endoglycosidase H resistance in radiolabel pulse-chase
experiments, whereas dominant-negative versions of Sar1 and Arf1 effectively
reduced the transport rate (supplemental Fig. 1C).Mutating Hydrophobic Residues in the Amphipathic α-Helix
Restores Protein Secretion—Arrangement of the N-terminal domain of
viperin into a helical wheel showed the classic amphipathic arrangement of
residues, with hydrophobic amino acids localized on an extended face of the
α-helix (Fig.
6). To determine whether this face of the α-helix
is involved in inhibiting protein secretion, specific hydrophobic residues
were mutated to alanine or glutamic acid (circled in
Fig. 6), and charged
arginine residues were mutated to serine (pink in
Fig. 6). Although
mutating hydrophobic residues to alanine or charged arginine residues to
serine did not alter the ability of viperin to inhibit protein secretion (data
not shown), mutating hydrophobic residues to glutamic acid partially or
completely restored protein secretion (Fig.
6). Although none of the single glutamic acid
substitutions affected the ER localization of viperin (supplemental Fig. 2),
mutating three hydrophobic residues to glutamic acid disrupted ER association
(Fig. 6). In
addition, sequentially deleting turns in the α-helix disrupted ER
association, resulting in the progressive relocalization of viperin to the
cytosol (supplemental Fig. 3).
FIGURE 6.
Point mutants in the amphipathic α-helix restore SeAP
secretion. A, shown is a helical wheel diagram of residues 9-42
of the N-terminal amphipathic α-helix of viperin, with hydrophobic
residues in blue, neutral potentially hydrogen-bonding residues in
red, acidic residues in green, basic residues in
pink, and other residues in orange (adapted from the Rutgers
University Helical Wheel Drawing Program). The numbered residues
outlined in black were mutated to glutamic acid. B, shown
are the results from analysis of SeAP secretion as described in the legend to
Fig. 2 with the
indicated viperin helical wheel mutants. SeAP secretion is expressed as a
percentage of the vector control. These results are representative of at least
three independent experiments. C, 293T cells expressing amphipathic
α-helix mutants with three hydrophobic residues mutated to glutamic acid
were analyzed by immunofluorescence for ER localization using calnexin.
DISCUSSION
Viperin has a broad range of antiviral activity and is highly conserved in
evolution, suggesting that it is functionally extremely important. As is the
case for other interferon-induced antiviral proteins, the precise mechanism(s)
of action of viperin remains largely unknown. To date, the only mechanistic
information indicates an effect of viperinexpression on lipid raft
microdomains and a potential role for the conserved putative Fe-S-binding
motif in HCV infection (4,
8). In this study, we
identified and examined the properties of the different domains of viperin. We
showed that a region in the C-terminal domain is important for protein
dimerization and that the N-terminal amphipathic α-helical domain is
required for ER localization and interferes with the secretion of soluble
proteins.Overexpression of viperin induced dramatic changes in ER morphology that
are characteristic of crystalloid ER. Crystalloid ER is induced by a number of
membrane-associated proteins
(11,
13). Current models for
crystalloid ER formation propose that smooth ER is morphologically altered
when the cytoplasmic domains of ER-bound proteins form high affinity dimers
and bring apposing membranes together to form a lattice-like pattern of
hexagonally packed tubules
(11-13).
Consistent with this model, we showed that viperin self-interacts to form
multimers, likely to be dimers. The interaction occurred in viperin truncation
mutants lacking the amphipathic α-helix, arguing that it is independent
of the ER localization domain. However, preliminary size exclusion data (data
not shown) obtained with purified, soluble, recombinant viperin lacking the
N-terminal α-helical domain suggest that the extent of dimerization is
low in solution; membrane association may enhance the tendency to multimerize
by limiting movement to the plane of the membrane. We did not find that
viperinexpression and crystalloid ER formation induced the unfolded protein
response, based on analysis of XBP-1 mRNA processing (data not shown)
(21).Viperin reduces protein secretion by HepG2 cells. A, HepG2
cells expressing the indicated proteins were radiolabeled with
[35S]methionine for 1 h and then chased for 2 h. The amount of
total 35S-labeled protein secreted into the supernatant was
normalized to the total amount of labeled proteins in cell extracts. Vector
and green fluorescent protein (GFP) served as negative controls,
whereas dominant-negative Sar1 (Sar1dn) and Arf1 (Arf1dn)
served as positive controls. The graph represents an average of three
independent experiments. B and C, HepG2 cells expressing
viperin or the vector control were [35S]methionine-labeled for 10
min and then chased for the indicated times. Supernatants and cell extracts
were immunoprecipitated (IP) with control antibodies (C) or
antibodies to albumin (B) or α1-antitrypsin
(α1AT)(C). Graphs on the right show the percent of
protein secreted normalized to the total amount of protein at time 0. These
results are representative of at least three independent experiments.Although crystalloid ER has dramatic effects on ER morphology, our data
suggest that it is not responsible for the defects in protein secretion that
we observed upon viperinexpression. We also failed to find any effects on
steady-state levels or localization of a number of ER resident proteins,
including tapasin, calnexin, ERp57, and Grp94 (data not shown). Expressing a
fusion protein containing the amphipathic α-helix N-terminal to
monomeric dsRed did not induce crystalloid ER formation but still inhibited
protein secretion to a level comparable with that observed with WT viperin. We
hypothesize that the N-terminal amphipathic α-helix induces localized
membrane curvature that is further exacerbated upon viperin dimerization via
its C terminus to cause crystalloid ER formation. Previous reports have shown
that amphipathic α-helices modulate membrane curvature
(9,
10,
22). Specifically, amphipathic
α-helices with wide hydrophobic faces, notably Sar1, localize to the ER
and induce membrane curvature
(9,
23). When specific hydrophobic
residues on the Sar1 helical wheel were changed to alanine, the mutant Sar1
proteins induced altered membrane tubulation and affected the size of
liposomes generated in vitro in association with Sar1
(23). Our mutational analysis
of the amphipathic α-helix of viperin showed that more dramatic changes
were required to observe an effect on secretion in that the hydrophobic
residues needed to be changed to charged glutamic acid residues rather than
alanine residues. This may be because the amphipathic α-helix of
viperin, which consists of 42 amino acids compared with 23 residues in the
case of Sar1, has a more extended hydrophobic face. Also compatible with this
idea is the observation that more than four helical turns had to be deleted or
at least three hydrophobic residues had to be mutated to glutamic acid to
induce dissociation of viperin from the ER membrane.Crystalloid ER formation upon viperinexpression is consistent with an
increase in membrane curvature of the ER, which may be caused by the
amphipathic α-helix and exacerbated by viperin dimerization. It is
tempting to infer that the increase in membrane curvature is also responsible
for the reduction in protein secretion that is observed upon expression of
viperin or the amphipathic α-helix linked to the marker protein dsRed.
Although not demonstrated here, the association of viperin with secretory coat
protein complex II (COPII) vesicles and an enhancement of membrane curvature
caused by the α-helix could reduce the size of the vesicles. Geometric
principles suggest that a reduction in the volume of secretory vesicles
induced by a reduction in curvature would reduce the incorporation of soluble
cargo to a much greater extent than transmembrane cargo, which might explain
the suppressive effect of viperinexpression on the transport of soluble but
not membrane-associated proteins. Unfortunately, attempts to purify
recombinant WT viperin were unsuccessful, and therefore, we were unable to
measure membrane curvature of viperin-associated liposomes in vitro.
However, the similarities between the amphipathic α-helices of viperin
and Sar1 suggest a similar mechanism of ER localization and potentially
similar effects on membrane curvature. Alternative hypotheses for a
viperin-induced reduction in soluble protein secretion but not
membrane-associated proteins do exist, however. For example, viperin could
differentially associate with vesicles bearing soluble or transmembrane cargo.
Resolution of this question awaits additional experiments.The N-terminal amphipathic α-helix of viperin is necessary
and sufficient to delay ER-to-Golgi trafficking of SeAP. A, 293T
cells were transiently transfected with SeAP and the indicated amounts of
viperin or control constructs and then analyzed for SeAP secretion 24 h
post-transfection. SeAP secretion is expressed as a percentage of the vector
control at 0.5 μg of transfected DNA. B, 293T cells transiently
expressing SeAP and the indicated constructs were
[35S]methionine-labeled for 10 min and then chased for the
indicated times. 293T cell detergent lysates were immunoprecipitated
(IP) with control (C) or anti-SeAP antibodies and then
treated with endoglycosidase H (Endo H). The graph shows the percent
of endoglycosidase H-resistant SeAP for each time point. C, SeAP
secretion was examined as described for A with the indicated
constructs. SeAP secretion is expressed as a percentage of the vector control
at 0.25 μg of transfected DNA. D, the acquisition of SeAP
endoglycosidase H resistance was examined as described for B with the
indicated constructs. Each experiment is representative of at least three
independent experiments.Point mutants in the amphipathic α-helix restore SeAP
secretion. A, shown is a helical wheel diagram of residues 9-42
of the N-terminal amphipathic α-helix of viperin, with hydrophobic
residues in blue, neutral potentially hydrogen-bonding residues in
red, acidic residues in green, basic residues in
pink, and other residues in orange (adapted from the Rutgers
University Helical Wheel Drawing Program). The numbered residues
outlined in black were mutated to glutamic acid. B, shown
are the results from analysis of SeAP secretion as described in the legend to
Fig. 2 with the
indicated viperin helical wheel mutants. SeAP secretion is expressed as a
percentage of the vector control. These results are representative of at least
three independent experiments. C, 293T cells expressing amphipathic
α-helix mutants with three hydrophobic residues mutated to glutamic acid
were analyzed by immunofluorescence for ER localization using calnexin.A key question is whether the viperin-induced effects on the ER could
contribute to its antiviral activity. Viperin may inhibit the trafficking of
soluble virally encoded and cellular proteins necessary for viral replication,
and certain viruses also use membranes derived from the ER for viral
replication, budding, and exit via the secretory route
(24,
25). Therefore, one of the
antiviral functions of viperin may be to prevent or alter the formation of
these membranous complexes, thus affecting viral replication or egress. A
previous report suggests that viperin inhibits HCV replication
(5), which is known to generate
a replication complex potentially derived from ER membranes. Future studies
will investigate if viperin can specifically alter formation of the HCV
replication complex and prevent HCV replication.Although viperin shares significant homology with the MoaA family of
radical S-adenosylmethionine enzymes and contains a characteristic
conserved CxxxCxxC motif, to date, we have been unable to
show that viperin binds iron. Both 55Felabeling of
viperin-expressing yeast and heavy metal analysis of soluble recombinant
viperin produced in insect cells showed no binding of iron or other heavy
metals (data not shown). However, a previous study showed that mutating these
three cysteines to alanines abolished the anti-HCV activity of viperin
(8). It is possible that
viperin binds Fe-S clusters weakly or transiently or that our expression
systems were insufficient to detect metal binding to mammalianviperin.
Alternatively, these cysteines may be critical for coordinating another,
unknown activity. To further investigate these possibilities, future studies
should examine such viperin mutants for antiviral activity against other
viruses.
Authors: Marcella Calfon; Huiqing Zeng; Fumihiko Urano; Jeffery H Till; Stevan R Hubbard; Heather P Harding; Scott G Clark; David Ron Journal: Nature Date: 2002-01-03 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Erik L Snapp; Ramanujan S Hegde; Maura Francolini; Francesca Lombardo; Sara Colombo; Emanuela Pedrazzini; Nica Borgese; Jennifer Lippincott-Schwartz Journal: J Cell Biol Date: 2003-10-27 Impact factor: 10.539
Authors: Arunkumar S Upadhyay; Oliver Stehling; Christakis Panayiotou; Ralf Rösser; Roland Lill; Anna K Överby Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2017-06-14 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Kristy J Szretter; James D Brien; Larissa B Thackray; Herbert W Virgin; Peter Cresswell; Michael S Diamond Journal: J Virol Date: 2011-08-31 Impact factor: 5.103