| Literature DB >> 22546897 |
Carole Couillault1, Patrick Fourquet, Matthieu Pophillat, Jonathan J Ewbank.
Abstract
The nematode C. elegans responds to infection by the fungus Drechmeria coniospora with a rapid increase in the expression of antimicrobial peptide genes. To investigate further the molecular basis of this innate immune response, we took a two-dimensional difference in-gel electrophoresis (2D-DIGE) approach to characterize the changes in host protein that accompany infection. We identified a total of 68 proteins from differentially represented spots and their corresponding genes. Through class testing, we identified functional categories that were enriched in our proteomic data set. One of these was "protein processing in endoplasmic reticulum," pointing to a potential link between innate immunity and endoplasmic reticulum function. This class included HSP-3, a chaperone of the BiP/GRP78 family known to act coordinately in the endoplasmic reticulum with its paralog HSP-4 to regulate the unfolded protein response (UPR). Other studies have shown that infection of C. elegans can provoke a UPR. We observed, however, that in adult C. elegans infection with D. coniospora did not induce a UPR, and conversely, triggering a UPR did not lead to an increase in expression of the well-characterized antimicrobial peptide gene nlp-29. On the other hand, we demonstrated a specific role for hsp-3 in the regulation of nlp-29 after infection that is not shared with hsp-4. Epistasis analysis allowed us to place hsp-3 genetically between the Tribbles-like kinase gene nipi-3 and the protein kinase C delta gene tpa-1. The precise function of hsp-3 has yet to be determined, but these results uncover a hitherto unsuspected link between a BiP/GRP78 family protein and innate immune signaling.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22546897 PMCID: PMC3442842 DOI: 10.4161/viru.20384
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Virulence ISSN: 2150-5594 Impact factor: 5.882
Table 1. Protein identification from narrow pH (4–7) gel
| Fractions | F1 | F2 | F3 | FNS | FT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of detected spots | 867 | 933 | 883 | 1,016 | 890 | 4,589 |
| Number of differentially represented spots | 12 | 14 | 13 | 28 | 0 | 67 |
| Number of identified spots | 4 | 6 | 7 | 26 | 0 | 43 |
Table 2. Protein identification from broad pH (3–10) gel
| Fraction | F1 | F2 | F3 | FNS | FT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of detected spots | 1,588 | 1,238 | 1,083 | 1,638 | 1,478 | 7,025 |
| Number of differentially represented spots | 35 | 13 | 7 | 45 | 3 | 103 |
| Number of identified spots | 20 | 1 | 0 | 33 | 1 | 55 |
Table 3. List of identified proteins from spots with different intensities
| Spot N° | Spot N° | Wormpep name | Worm base ID | Gene name |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | F1-740 | ZK455.1 | WBGene00000040 | |
| F2-401; FNS-17 | FNS-677 | C34E10.6 | WBGene00000229 | |
| FNS-489 | FNS-1706 | F47B10.1 | WBGene00009812 | |
| | FNS-1926 | K10B3.7 | WBGene00001685 | |
| | FNS-1965 | F33H1.2 | WBGene00001686 | |
| | FNS-1717 | H28O16.1 | WBGene00010419 | |
| FNS-228 | | Y45G12B.1 | WBGene00021562 | |
| F3-516 | | K12G11.3 | WBGene00010790 | |
| FNS-455 | | Y49A3A.2 | WBGene00013025 | |
| F3-516 | | Y39G8B.1 | WBGene00012722 | |
| F2-821 | F2-1119 | Y69A2AR.18 | WBGene00022089 | |
| FNS-401 | FNS-1522 | ZK829.4 | WBGene00014095 | |
| FNS-198 | | F40F9.6 | WBGene00009583 | |
| FNS-463 | | Y38A10A.5 | WBGene00000802 | |
| FNS-315 | | C15H9.6 | WBGene00002007 | |
| FNS-411 | | C07A12.4 | WBGene00003963 | |
| | F1-776 | Y113G7A.3 | WBGene00004754 | |
| FNS-239 | | T05E11.3 | WBGene00011480 | |
| F3-142 | | T14G8.3 | WBGene00011771 | |
| FNS-157 | | T24H7.2 | WBGene00020781 | |
| F1-463 | F1-1375; F1-1389; | M03F4.2 | WBGene00000066 | |
| F1-460 | | T25C8.2 | WBGene00000067 | |
| | FNS-1450 | B0334.3 | WBGene00007143 | |
| F2-100 | | C08H9.2 | WBGene00007463 | |
| | F1-1246; FNS1717 | C44B7.10 | WBGene00016630 | |
| | F1-1234 | C07H6.5 | WBGene00000479 | |
| | FNS-2317 | T03E6.7 | WBGene00000776 | |
| | FNS-2295 | F58G1.4 | WBGene00010266 | |
| F3-526; F3-531 | FNS-1996 | C18A11.7 | WBGene00001000 | |
| FNS-684 | | F54H12.6 | WBGene00018846 | |
| FNS-684 | | Y41E3.10 | WBGene00012768 | |
| FNS-209 | FNS-996; FNS-1002; | F25H5.4 | WBGene00001167 | |
| | | F09B12.3 | WBGene00008607 | |
| | | F57F4.4 | WBGene00019017 | |
| FNS-285; FNS-286; | | T21G5.3 | WBGene00001598 | |
| FNS-489 | | C26D10.2 | WBGene00001840 | |
| FNS-390 | | Y22D7AL.5 | WBGene00002025 | |
| | F1-1012 | F10C1.2 | WBGene00002053 | |
| FNS-401 | | M6.1 | WBGene00002056 | |
| | FNS-1051 | C43C3.1 | WBGene00002067 | |
| FNS-503 | | F57B9.6 | WBGene00002083 | |
| | F1-553; F1-579 | K08H10.2 | WBGene00010695 | |
| | FNS-1284 | Y71H2AM.19 | WBGene00002244 | |
| | F1-533; F1-579 | K08H10.1 | WBGene00002263 | |
| | FT-1877 | Y55B1AR.1 | WBGene00002269 | |
| | F1–1012 | DY3.2 | WBGene00003052 | |
| | FNS-1051 | Y48C3A.7 | WBGene00003119 | |
| F2-821 | | Y69A2AR.30 | WBGene00003161 | |
| F3-731 | | C36E6.3 | WBGene00003369 | |
| | F1-362; F1-367 | R07G3.3 | WBGene00019940 | |
| FNS-134 | FNS-739 | F54F2.1 | WBGene00003929 | |
| | F2-1199 | R05G6.7 | WBGene00019900 | |
| F2-564; F3-516 | | F25H2.10 | WBGene00004408 | |
| F2-584 | | B0041.4 | WBGene00004415 | |
| | F1-741 | T22F3.3 | WBGene00020696 | |
| F2-456; FNS-463 | F1-1115; FNS1669 | K01G5.7 | WBGene00006536 | |
| F2-401; FNS-455 | | C36E8.5 | WBGene00006537 | |
| | FNS-1567 | Y71H2AM.23 | WBGene00007000 | |
| FNS-784 | | F40G9.3 | WBGene00006715 | |
| F1-114; F3-97 | F1-463; FNS-373 | F11C3.3 | WBGene00006789 | |
| | F1-1234; F1-1246 | F08B6.4 | WBGene00006819 | |
| | F1-908 | Y54E10A.9 | WBGene00006888 | |
| | FNS-534 | K09F5.2 | WBGene00006925 | |
| | FNS-501; FNS-517; FNS-518 | C42D8.2 | WBGene00006926 | |
| | FNS-518; FNS-532 | F59D8.1 | WBGene00006927 | |
| | FNS-531; FNS-534 | F59D8.2 | WBGene00006928 | |
| | FNS-1126; FNS-1129 | K07H8.6 | WBGene00006930 | |
| FNS-831 | Y48A6B.3 | WBGene00012964 |
* Proteins implicated in a metabolic pathway. Protein processing in endoplasmic reticulum.
Table 4. Functional classification by EASE of differentially represented proteins
| Gene category | Infection | Stress | List hits | Population hits | Probability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Down ≥ 2x | | X | 25 | 234 | 7.6E-31 |
| Proteome changes | X | | 17 | 109 | 7.2E-24 |
| Differentially expressed proteins in | | | 7 | 13 | 9.0E-15 |
| Protein expression; Kim 2001 | | | 14 | 446 | 4.7E-10 |
| Proteome changes | X | | 7 | 64 | 2.8E-09 |
| Down ≥ 2x dauer; Halaschek-Wiener 2005 | | X | 6 | 36 | 2.9E-09 |
| Differentially expressed proteins in | | | 4 | 12 | 7.2E-08 |
| Up > 1.75x in | X | | 6 | 69 | 1.7E-07 |
| Glycoproteins GaL6 binding; Kaji 2007 | | | 9 | 287 | 8.0E-07 |
| Heat shock; Kim 2001 | | X | 4 | 25 | 1.8E-06 |
| Cell structural, muscle; Kim 2001 | | | 9 | 332 | 2.6E-06 |
| Down after organophosphorus pesticide chlorpyrifos + diazinon; Vinuela 2010 | | X | 5 | 65 | 3.5E-06 |
| Regulated down_ | | X | 7 | 222 | 1.4E-05 |
| Down > 1.75x in | X | | 4 | 44 | 1.8E-05 |
| Down after organophosphorus pesticide diazinon; Vinuela 2010 | | X | 5 | 121 | 7.2E-05 |
| Regulated down_Bt toxin, Cry5B; Huffman 2004 | | X | 8 | 442 | 0.00017 |
| Differentially expressed proteins in | | | 2 | 7 | 0.00026 |
| Regulated down_Cadmium; Huffman 2004 | | X | 7 | 388 | 0.00046 |
| Energy generation; Kim 2001 | | | 4 | 104 | 0.00052 |
| Up > 1.75x in | X | | 3 | 45 | 0.00055 |
| Down ≥ 2x oxidative stress; Park 2009 | | X | 2 | 13 | 0.00095 |
| DNA synthesis; Kim 2001 | | | 7 | 440 | 0.00096 |
| Up ≥ 2x by PA14 8h; Troemel 2006 | X | | 5 | 233 | 0.00146 |
| Overlap Between oxidative stress and aging—downregulated genes by oxidative stress; Park 2009 | X | 3 | 66 | 0.00169 |

Figure 1. Fungal infection of adult worms does not induce a UPR. (A) RT-PCR analysis of xbp-1 splicing. Under standard culture conditions (control), a 220 bp amplicon from an unspliced (us) xbp-1 transcript is detected, together with very low levels of a 197 bp amplicon from a spliced (s) transcript. The abundance of this smaller band does not increase after infection with D. coniospora (infection) or PMA treatment (PMA), but is clearly increased upon UPR-induction with tunicamycin (Tu). (B) The green fluorescence in transgenic worms carrying a pnlp-29::GFP (strain IG274; left column) or a phsp-4::GFP (IG1320; right column) reporter was observed after infection, exposure to tunicamycin, or high salt. While infection and osmotic stress induced high level of pnlp-29::GFP expression, tunicamycin induced phsp-4::GFP.

Figure 2. A specific role for hsp-3 in the regulation of nlp-29. (A) Quantification of the effect of control (K04G11.3), GFP, hsp-3 and sta-2 RNAi on pnlp-29::GFP expression in a wild-type or daf-16(mu86) mutant background. For reasons given elsewhere, in this and the subsequent graphs, error bars are not shown. Data are representative of three independent experiments. (B) Quantification of pnlp-29::GFP expression in hsp-3(ok1083) and hsp-4(gk514) mutant backgrounds following different treatments. In all cases, quantification was with the COPAS Biosort. The normalized average ratio of green to red fluorescence is shown. The analysis was restricted to worms with a TOF above 450. The number of worms analyzed here and in subsequent figures is given in the .

Figure 3.hsp-3 acts genetically downstream of nipi-3 but not of gpa-12. (A) pnlp-29::GFP reporter expression was quantified in wt and hsp-3(ok1083) mutant worms with (black bars) or without (blue bars) copies of a transgene containing nipi-3 under the control of its own promoter. (B) Quantification of pnlp-29::GFP reporter expression in wt, tpa-1(k530), nipi-3(fr4) and hsp-3(ok1083) mutant worms with (green bars) or without (blue bars) copies of a transgene containing a gain-of-function (*) allele of gpa-12 under the control of the epidermis-specific col-19 promoter. Both pnipi-3::NIPI-3 and pcol-19::GPA-12* transgenes provoke a robust nlp-29 upregulation in the absence of infection in adult worms. Quantification was with the COPAS Biosort. The normalized average ratio of green fluorescence to time of flight (TOF) is shown. The analysis was restricted to worms with a TOF between 450 and 650.

Figure 4. Model of the control of nlp-29 expression. Signals perceived upon D. coniospora infection and injury are transduced by a PKCδ - p38 MAPK pathway to regulate the expression of nlp-29. HSP-3 functions between NIPI-3 and the PKCδ TPA-1. Many other known regulatory elements, including the OSM-11/WNK-1/GCK-3 pathway and the recently described pseudokinase NIPI-4 have been omitted for the sake of clarity.