RATIONALE: GTP cyclohydrolase I (GTPCH-1) is the rate-limiting enzyme involved in de novo biosynthesis of tetrahydrobiopterin (BH(4)), an essential cofactor for NO synthases and aromatic amino acid hydroxylases. GTPCH-1 undergoes negative feedback regulation by its end-product BH(4) via interaction with the GTP cyclohydrolase feedback regulatory protein (GFRP). Such a negative feedback mechanism should maintain cellular BH(4) levels within a very narrow range; however, we recently identified a phosphorylation site (S81) on human GTPCH-1 that markedly increases BH(4) production in response to laminar shear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to define how S81 phosphorylation alters GTPCH-1 enzyme activity and how this is modulated by GFRP. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using prokaryotically expressed proteins, we found that the GTPCH-1 phospho-mimetic mutant (S81D) has increased enzyme activity, reduced binding to GFRP and resistance to inhibition by GFRP compared to wild-type GTPCH-1. Using small interfering RNA or overexpressing plasmids, GFRP was shown to modulate phosphorylation of GTPCH-1, BH(4) levels, and NO production in human endothelial cells. Laminar, but not oscillatory shear stress, caused dissociation of GTPCH-1 and GFRP, promoting GTPCH-1 phosphorylation. We also found that both GTPCH-1 phosphorylation and GFRP downregulation prevents endothelial NO synthase uncoupling in response to oscillatory shear. Finally oscillatory shear was associated with impaired GTPCH-1 phosphorylation and reduced BH(4) levels in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: These studies provide a new mechanism for regulation of endothelial GTPCH-1 by its phosphorylation and interplay with GFRP. This mechanism allows for escape from GFRP negative feedback and permits large amounts of BH(4) to be produced in response to laminar shear stress.
RATIONALE: GTP cyclohydrolase I (GTPCH-1) is the rate-limiting enzyme involved in de novo biosynthesis of tetrahydrobiopterin (BH(4)), an essential cofactor for NO synthases and aromatic amino acid hydroxylases. GTPCH-1 undergoes negative feedback regulation by its end-product BH(4) via interaction with the GTP cyclohydrolase feedback regulatory protein (GFRP). Such a negative feedback mechanism should maintain cellular BH(4) levels within a very narrow range; however, we recently identified a phosphorylation site (S81) on humanGTPCH-1 that markedly increases BH(4) production in response to laminar shear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to define how S81 phosphorylation alters GTPCH-1 enzyme activity and how this is modulated by GFRP. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using prokaryotically expressed proteins, we found that the GTPCH-1 phospho-mimetic mutant (S81D) has increased enzyme activity, reduced binding to GFRP and resistance to inhibition by GFRP compared to wild-type GTPCH-1. Using small interfering RNA or overexpressing plasmids, GFRP was shown to modulate phosphorylation of GTPCH-1, BH(4) levels, and NO production in human endothelial cells. Laminar, but not oscillatory shear stress, caused dissociation of GTPCH-1 and GFRP, promoting GTPCH-1 phosphorylation. We also found that both GTPCH-1 phosphorylation and GFRP downregulation prevents endothelial NO synthase uncoupling in response to oscillatory shear. Finally oscillatory shear was associated with impaired GTPCH-1 phosphorylation and reduced BH(4) levels in vivo. CONCLUSIONS: These studies provide a new mechanism for regulation of endothelial GTPCH-1 by its phosphorylation and interplay with GFRP. This mechanism allows for escape from GFRP negative feedback and permits large amounts of BH(4) to be produced in response to laminar shear stress.
Authors: Bruno Fink; Karine Laude; Louise McCann; Abdul Doughan; David G Harrison; Sergey Dikalov Journal: Am J Physiol Cell Physiol Date: 2004-08-11 Impact factor: 4.249
Authors: J Scott McNally; Michael E Davis; Don P Giddens; Aniket Saha; Jinah Hwang; Sergey Dikalov; Hanjoong Jo; David G Harrison Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2003-09-04 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Christopher S Rabender; Asim Alam; Gobalakrishnan Sundaresan; Robert J Cardnell; Vasily A Yakovlev; Nitai D Mukhopadhyay; Paul Graves; Jamal Zweit; Ross B Mikkelsen Journal: Mol Cancer Res Date: 2015-02-27 Impact factor: 5.852
Authors: Young-Mi Go; Chan Woo Kim; Douglas I Walker; Dong Won Kang; Sandeep Kumar; Michael Orr; Karan Uppal; Arshed A Quyyumi; Hanjoong Jo; Dean P Jones Journal: Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol Date: 2014-11-05 Impact factor: 3.619
Authors: Danielle J McCullough; Robert T Davis; James M Dominguez; John N Stabley; Christian S Bruells; Bradley J Behnke Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2011-01-06
Authors: Chih-Wen Ni; Haiwei Qiu; Amir Rezvan; Kihwan Kwon; Douglas Nam; Dong Ju Son; Jane E Visvader; Hanjoong Jo Journal: Blood Date: 2010-06-15 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Rupak Pathak; Snehalata A Pawar; Qiang Fu; Prem K Gupta; Maaike Berbée; Sarita Garg; Vijayalakshmi Sridharan; Wenze Wang; Prabath G Biju; Kimberly J Krager; Marjan Boerma; Sanchita P Ghosh; Amrita K Cheema; Howard P Hendrickson; Nukhet Aykin-Burns; Martin Hauer-Jensen Journal: Antioxid Redox Signal Date: 2013-05-03 Impact factor: 8.401