Chiharu Graybill1, Kenneth E Prehoda. 1. The Institute of Molecular Biology and Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Oregon , Eugene, Oregon 97403, United States.
Abstract
In Par complex-mediated cell polarity, phosphorylation by atypical protein kinase C (aPKC) is coupled to substrate cortical displacement. Polarized substrates often contain multiple phosphorylation sites, but the role of multisite phosphorylation in Par-mediated polarity remains unclear. Here, we have dissected the role of the three aPKC phosphorylation sites within the tumor suppressor Lethal giant larvae. Using a cultured Drosophila S2 cell cortical displacement assay, we observed that phosphorylation at any one site causes only partial displacement. Complete displacement requires that all three sites be modified. We undertook a kinetic analysis to determine if aPKC phosphorylates each site equivalently. As the sites are closely spaced, we observed not only differences in the rate of phosphorylation but also interaction between the sites. A complete description of the rates reveals a preferential order of phosphorylation. Our results provide new insights into how multiple phosphorylations and phosphorylation rates could regulate localization behaviors of fate determinants at the cortex.
In Par complex-mediated cell polarity, phosphorylation by atypical protein kinase C (aPKC) is coupled to substrate cortical displacement. Polarized substrates often contain multiple phosphorylation sites, but the role of multisite phosphorylation in Par-mediated polarity remains unclear. Here, we have dissected the role of the three aPKC phosphorylation sites within the tumor suppressor Lethal giant larvae. Using a cultured DrosophilaS2 cell cortical displacement assay, we observed that phosphorylation at any one site causes only partial displacement. Complete displacement requires that all three sites be modified. We undertook a kinetic analysis to determine if aPKC phosphorylates each site equivalently. As the sites are closely spaced, we observed not only differences in the rate of phosphorylation but also interaction between the sites. A complete description of the rates reveals a preferential order of phosphorylation. Our results provide new insights into how multiple phosphorylations and phosphorylation rates could regulate localization behaviors of fate determinants at the cortex.
Many cells organize their cortical
regions into large, molecularly discrete domains. The resulting cell
polarity is essential for a broad array of processes, including cytokinesis,
movement, and asymmetric division.[1−4] Atypical protein kinase C (aPKC), part of
the Par polarity complex, has emerged as a key organizer of the cell
cortex.[5−7] In Par-mediated polarity, upstream components specify
the location and activity of aPKC. Once at the cortex, aPKC phosphorylates
substrates, displacing them into the cytoplasm, thereby ensuring that
they occupy only cortical regions opposite aPKC.[6,8,9] Because a key aspect of Par polarity is
phosphorylation-coupled cortical displacement, we have investigated
the detailed kinetics of aPKC substrate phosphorylation and the requirements
for release from the cortex.The Par complex directs polarity
in diverse systems using a mechanism
that relies on aPKC-mediated phosphorylation. Besides aPKC, the Par
complex consists of Par-3 (Bazooka in flies) and Par-6. These proteins,
along with a large number of upstream regulators, control aPKC localization
and kinase activity in cells ranging from epithelia to neural stem
cells.[10,11] When not bound to Par-6, aPKC exists in
an autoinhibited form with an internal pseudosubstrate motif bound
to its kinase domain.[12] Recruitment to
the cortex by Par-3 and Par-6 activates aPKC such that it can efficiently
phosphorylate target proteins, such as the tumor suppressor Lethal
giant larvae (Lgl) and the fate determinants Numb and Miranda. Once
phosphorylated, these substrates become cytoplasmic, effectively displacing
them from cortical regions containing aPKC. In the absence of aPKC
catalytic activity, these substrates become depolarized with severe
physiological consequences.[13−15]As substrate phosphorylation
by aPKC appears to be a central element
of polarity, we have investigated the detailed kinetics of the process.
Many aPKC substrates contain numerous phosphorylation sites (e.g.,
three sites for Lgl,[13] five sites for Mira,[15] and five sites for Numb[14]), and nonphosphorylatable mutants are not polarized by aPKC. These
studies suggest that multisite phosphorylation is an important component
of polarization by aPKC, although this hypothesis has not been tested.
Is phosphorylation at all sites required for cortical displacement?
Are the kinetic parameters for aPKC phosphorylation the same at each
site? Is there synergy between phosphorylation at each site?Here, we investigated the role of multiple phosphorylations using
Lgl as a model aPKC substrate. First, we tested the number of phosphorylation
sites needed for cortical displacement of Lgl using cultured DrosophilaS2 cells. We find that Lgl requires at least
two, possibly three, phosphorylations for membrane displacement. Also,
we examined how aPKC phosphorylates Lgl at three Ser residues using in vitro kinase assays. These results demonstrate that the
three sites are not kinetically equivalent, for aPKC shows a clear
preference among them. Furthermore, we utilized phospho-mimetic mutants
to test whether multiphosphorylation is dependent. We find that it
is dependent, but the effects depend on the position of the phospho-mimetic
mutation(s). We conclude that phosphorylation of Lgl at multiple sites
by aPKC plays a vital role in the regulation of Lgl localization.
Our results may be extended to the other aPKC substrates and differentiation
factors to improve our understanding of the mechanism of polarization.
Our findings could also provide new insight into the substrate recognition
and preference of aPKC.
Experimental Procedures
S2 Lgl Cortical Localization
Assay
Immunofluorescence
was as previously described.[16] Briefly,
for S2 cell expression, Lgl fused to mCherry or eGFP was expressed
using the pMT vector that places Lgl downstream of the metallothionen
promoter. Lgl was visualized by direct imaging of the fluorescent
protein. For conditions in which aPKC was expressed with Lgl, a constitutively
active aPKC variant (A134D)[12] was expressed
with a modified pMT vector containing the Drosophilatubulin promoter in place of the metallothionen promoter.[12] mCherry:Lgl and eGFP:Lgl coding sequences were
cloned into the pMT vector using 5′-BglII and 3′-XhoI
sites. DrosophilaSchneider (S2) cells were maintained
in Schneider’s Medium with 10% fetal bovine serum at room temperature.
Approximately 2 × 106 cells were seeded per well in
a six-well plate and transfected with 0.5 μg of each construct
using Effectene transfection reagent according to the manufacturer’s
protocol. After cells had been incubated overnight and induced with
0.5 mM CuSO4 for 24 h, 200 μL of cells was seeded
on 12 mm diameter glass coverslips in a 24-well plate and allowed
to adhere for 1 h. Cells were fixed for 20 min with 4% formaldehyde
in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) followed by three rinses of wash
buffer (0.1% saponin in PBS) and two rinses of block buffer (0.1%
saponin and 1% bovine serum albumin in PBS). Coverslips were incubated
overnight at 4 °C with rabbit anti-aPKC antibody (1:1000, Santa
Cruz Biotechnology). Coverslips were then rinsed three times with
blocking buffer, incubated at room temperature for 2 h with a species-specific
secondary antibody (1:200, Jackson Immunoresearch), rinsed three times
in washing buffer, and mounted in Vectashield Hardset Mounting Medium
(Vector Laboratories). Images were acquired on a confocal microscope
(Radiance, Bio-Rad Laboratories) using an oil-immersion 60× 1.4
NA objective, processed with ImageJ, and assembled in Adobe Illustrator.
Quantification of Lgl Localization and Statistical Analyses
The average Lgl signal at the cell periphery from a confocal slice
through the center of the cell was measured with ImageJ. Similarly,
the cytoplasmic area excluding the nucleus was selected, and its mean
intensity was measured for the same cell. For conditions used for
the co-expression of aPKC, the mean level of expression was 7–10
times the level of endogenous aPKC, as assessed by reactivity with
the anti-aPKC antibody. The average cortical:cytoplamsic ratios were
calculated for each Lgl construct and plotted using GraphPad Prism.
To analyze the data, we compared the average ratios of Lgl AAA, Lgl
AAA with aPKC, and Lgl wt with aPKC against all the other ratios using
one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Purification of aPKC 259–606
(Kinase Domain)
HEK293 F cells (1 × 106 cells/mL)
were transfected
with pCMV His6-aPKC 259–606 and pCMV dPDK-1 (without
any tag) using the 293fectin transfection reagent (Life Technologies).
The cells were incubated at 37 °C for 48 h. For harvesting, the
cells were resuspended with Ni2+ lysis buffer [50 mM Tris-HCl
(pH 7.5), 300 mM NaCl, 1 mM MgCl, 10 mM β-ME, and 10 mM imidazole,
adjusted to pH 7.5 with NaOH]. The cells were lysed by being passed
through a 21-gauge needle, and the lysate was clarified by centrifugation
at 15000 rpm for 30 min at 4 °C. The supernatant was incubated
with Ni2+-NTA resins for 45 min at 4 °C and then washed
with lysis buffer. Following elution using Ni2+ elution
buffer (lysis buffer with 250 mM imidazole), the eluted proteins were
dialyzed at 4 °C for 4 h against 20 mM Tris-HCl, 50 mM NaCl,
and 1 mM dithiothreitol (DTT). The concentration of aPKC was determined
by comparing its reactivity with an anti-aPKC antibody (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology) with that of a standard at a known concentration (bacterially
expressed aPKC kinase domain purified and quantified using a Bradford
dye binding assay) on a Western blot.
Expression and Purification
of Lgl Peptides
Residues
647–673 of DrosophilaLgl isoform A were cloned
into the pMAL-C2 vector (New England BioLabs Inc.), in which a TEV
protease recognition site was added following the maltose binding
protein (MBP) coding sequence. For expression, Escherichia
coli BL21 was transformed with the appropriate vector and
induced by addition of IPTG to a final concentration of 0.4 mM followed
by overnight growth at 18 °C. The bacterial lysates were incubated
with amylose resins (New England BioLabs Inc.). The resins were washed
with MBP lysis buffer [20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 200 mM NaCl, 1 mM
EDTA, and 1 mM DTT]. The MBP fusion proteins were eluted with MBP
elution buffer (lysis buffer with 5 mM maltose) and dialyzed at 4
°C overnight in 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 50 mM NaCl, and 1 mM
DTT.
In Vitro Kinase Activity Assay
aPKC
kinase activity was measured as previously described.[12] Briefly, the purified aPKC kinase domain was diluted to
concentrations at which the incorporation of radiolabeled phosphate
from [γ-32P]ATP into MBP-Lgl peptides was linear
with respect to time and enzyme concentration. The diluted enzymes
were preincubated in assay buffer [50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 100 mM
NaCl, and 10 mM MgCl2] with a wide range of MBP-Lgl peptide
concentrations at 30 °C for 5 min. The reactions were initiated
by adding 1 mM ATP spiked with [γ-32P]ATP (∼1.0
× 106 per nanomole of ATP). The reaction mixtures
were incubated at 30 °C for 10 min. The reaction mixtures were
blotted on grade P81 phosphopaper (Whatman). The reactions were quenched
when the blotted P81 paper was immediately submerged in 75 mM H3PO4; 5 mL of scintillation fluid was added to measure
the radioactive decays with a liquid scintillation counter. The kinetic
parameters were calculated by fitting the data to the Michealis–Menten
equation in GraphPad Prism.
Kinetic Modeling
Copasi was used
to model aPKC phosphorylation
of Lgl. The model contained empirical values of KM and kcat for each site (both
with and without adjacent phosphorylations). Simulations were compared
against a time course of Lgl phosphorylation to test the model.
Separation of Singly, Doubly, and Triply Phosphorylated Lgl
Peptides
A reaction mixture containing 15 μM MBP-Lgl
647–673, the aPKC kinase domain, and 1 mM ATP in the reaction
buffer described above was set up and incubated at 30 °C for
90 min. Small aliquots of the reaction mixture were quenched via sodium
dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS–PAGE)
loading buffer periodically during the incubation. The quenched samples
were run on Mn2+-Phos-tag SDS–PAGE (Wako USA). The
phosphorylated Lgl was detected on a Western blot using mouse anti-MBP
(1:1000, Santa Cruz Biotechnology) and bovine anti-mouse HRP (1:2000,
Santa Cruz Biotechnology) antibodies.
Results
Lgl Cortical
Displacement Requires Phosphorylation at Multiple
Serines
Lgl phosphorylation by aPKC is critical for its function
in cell polarity. aPKC phosphorylates Lgl at three serine residues in vitro, and nonphosphorylatable Lgl fails to be released
from the cell cortex.[13] The ectopic localization
of nonphosphorylatable Lgl disrupts the polarity of both asymmetrically
dividing neural stem cells[13] and epithelia.[17] Although phosphorylation plays a crucial role
in Lgl localization and function, the role of Lgl’s multiple
phosphorylation sites is unknown.To determine the role of individual
Lgl phosphorylation events in its localization, we expressed Lgl harboring
mutations at its phosphorylation sites (Figure 1A) in cultured DrosophilaS2 cells, a well-established
system for assessing the effect of aPKC on Lgl cortical localization.[13,15,16] In this assay, the degree to
which Lgl localizes to the cortex is measured using the ratio of the
Lgl signal (from the fluorescent protein signal visualized in a confocal
section through the middle of the cell) at the periphery of the cell
to that in the cytoplasm. When Lgl is expressed by itself in S2 cells,
it is predominantly cortically localized (cortical:cytoplasmic ratio
of >2:1), but co-expression of aPKC leads to its displacement into
the cytoplasm (cortical:cytoplasmic ratio of ∼1:1); this effect
requires the presence of the Lgl phosphorylation sites[12,13,15] (Figure 1B,C). For this study, we used a constitutively active form of aPKC
that contains a mutation in its pseudosubstrate (A134D) that prevents
it from repressing the kinase domain.[12] This high level of activity was to ensure that cells contained sufficient
aPKC activity to phosphorylate all available Lgl sites. The low level
of variance we observed in the localization ratio of each Lgl phospho-mutant
(Figure 1C) is consistent with this scenario.
Figure 1
Phosphorylation
at all three Lgl aPKC sites is required for complete
cortical displacement. (A) Lgl domain structure and aPKC phospho-site
positions. (B) Localization of Lgl (wild type and aPKC phospho-site
mutants) in cultured Drosophila S2 cells. Images
represent confocal slices through the center of the cell using the
fluorescence of the attached mCherry or eGFP fluorophore. (C) Quantification
of Lgl cortical and cytoplasmic localization (n =
50 for each condition). The cortical signal was measured as the mean
signal from the periphery of the cell, whereas cytoplasmic was the
mean from the non-nuclear interior. ANOVA statistical analysis reveals
that cortical recruitment of wild-type Lgl is indistinguishable from
that of singly phosphorylated Lgl (SAA, ASA, and AAS), and Lgl variants
with two phosphorylatable sites (ASS, SAS, and SSA) can be distinguished
from the wild type. Error bars represent the standard error.
Phosphorylation
at all three LglaPKC sites is required for complete
cortical displacement. (A) Lgl domain structure and aPKC phospho-site
positions. (B) Localization of Lgl (wild type and aPKC phospho-site
mutants) in cultured DrosophilaS2 cells. Images
represent confocal slices through the center of the cell using the
fluorescence of the attached mCherry or eGFP fluorophore. (C) Quantification
of Lgl cortical and cytoplasmic localization (n =
50 for each condition). The cortical signal was measured as the mean
signal from the periphery of the cell, whereas cytoplasmic was the
mean from the non-nuclear interior. ANOVA statistical analysis reveals
that cortical recruitment of wild-type Lgl is indistinguishable from
that of singly phosphorylated Lgl (SAA, ASA, and AAS), and Lgl variants
with two phosphorylatable sites (ASS, SAS, and SSA) can be distinguished
from the wild type. Error bars represent the standard error.We tested all possible combinations
of Lgl phospho-site mutations
(serine to alanine) to determine the effect of multiple mutations
on Lgl localization behavior. The resulting data set would allow us
to determine if phosphorylation on a particular site is required for
cortical displacement or if the total number of phosphorylations is
the determining factor. We observed remarkably uniform behavior for
Lgl proteins of a particular category (i.e., one or two phospho-sites),
indicating that localization “information” is distributed
among each of the sites (Figure 1B,C). Singly
phosphorylated Lgls localized in a manner indistinguishable from that
of the wild type, and while two phosphorylations had a detectable
displacement into the cytoplasm, three phosphorylations had the lowest
cortical:cytoplasmic ratio (Figure 1B,C). We
conclude that no individual phosphorylation is sufficient to release
Lgl from the cortex and that all three phosphorylations are required
for full displacement.
aPKC Preferentially Phosphorylates Lgl at
S656 and S664
The localization assay demonstrated the necessity
of multiple phosphorylations
for Lgl displacement. This raises the question of how Lgl becomes
phosphorylated at all sites. In particular, we sought to determine
if intrinsic kinetic differences among the three sites could be important
for Lgl localization and function, and if phosphorylation at one site
influenced the kinetic parameters at others. The proximity of the
Lgl phospho-sites, and the positively charged character of the aPKC
recognition sequence (Figure 2A),[18] suggested that interactions between sites are
highly likely. While each satisfies the requirement at positions P–5,
P–2, and P+1, they all fail to match at positions P–4
and P+2 (the positions of these sites on the aPKC kinase domain structure[18] are shown in Figure 2B). Also, there are more variations at N-terminal residues away from
each phosphorylation site. Therefore, comparison of each of the Lgl
subsite sequences with the consensus sequence further suggests that
aPKC could have different kinetic parameters for each of the three
sites.
Figure 2
Nonequivalent phosphorylation of the three Lgl phospho-sites by
aPKC. (A) Amino acid sequence alignment of Lgl phosphorylation sites.
The phopho-accepting serines (P0) are labeled with red asterisks.
The optimal consensus sequence is shown at the bottom.[25] (B) Structure of a Par-3 peptide bound to the
kinase domain of human aPKCι.[18] The
substrate’s residue positions are labeled with respect to the
phospho-accepting residue (P0). The residues positioned N-terminal
and C-terminal to P0 are negatively and positively numbered, respectively.
Protein Data Bank entry 4DC2. (C) Kinetic analyses
of each singly phosphorylated Lgl peptide, showing differences in KM and kcat. Error
bars represent the standard error. (D) Possible pathways to phosphorylate
all three serine residues. Phosphorylated residues are colored red.
If the phosphorylation events are independent, on the basis of the
results from panel B, preferential phosphorylation occurs in the following
order: S664 → S656 → S660.
Nonequivalent phosphorylation of the three Lgl phospho-sites by
aPKC. (A) Amino acid sequence alignment of Lgl phosphorylation sites.
The phopho-accepting serines (P0) are labeled with red asterisks.
The optimal consensus sequence is shown at the bottom.[25] (B) Structure of a Par-3 peptide bound to the
kinase domain of humanaPKCι.[18] The
substrate’s residue positions are labeled with respect to the
phospho-accepting residue (P0). The residues positioned N-terminal
and C-terminal to P0 are negatively and positively numbered, respectively.
Protein Data Bank entry 4DC2. (C) Kinetic analyses
of each singly phosphorylated Lgl peptide, showing differences in KM and kcat. Error
bars represent the standard error. (D) Possible pathways to phosphorylate
all three serine residues. Phosphorylated residues are colored red.
If the phosphorylation events are independent, on the basis of the
results from panel B, preferential phosphorylation occurs in the following
order: S664 → S656 → S660.To determine whether the three serine residues are equivalent,
we generated singly phoshorylatable Lgl peptides and performed in vitro kinase assays. We used the kinase domain as full
length aPKC is repressed by a pseudosubstrate contained within its
sequence. Using Michaelis–Menten analyses, we determined the
catalytic efficiency (kcat/KM) for phosphorylation at each subsite. As shown in Figure 2C, KM values for phosphorylation
at each site were 7.8 ± 1.5, 11.4 ± 5.8, and 3.8 ±
0.6 μM and kcat values were 3.2
± 0.2, 1.5 ± 0.3, and 4.3 ± 0.2 s–1 for SAA, ASA, and ASA, respectively. The catalytic efficiency values
were 0.40 ± 0.06, 0.13 ± 0.01, and 1.14 ± 0.40 μM–1 s–1, respectively. There are six
possible pathways to phosphorylate all three Lglserine residues (Figure 2D), and if the sites were independent, our data
would indicate the following preferential order: S664 > S656 >
S660.
aPKC Phosphorylation of Lgl Is Cooperative
As each
serine residue in Lgl is separated by only three residues, it is likely
that phosphorylation events interact with one another, with phosphorylation
at one site influencing the kinetic parameters of others. To investigate
whether Lgl phosphorylation by aPKC is cooperative, we utilized phospho-mimetic
mutants of Lgl peptides and tested them in kinase activity assays.
We have used phospho-mimetic mutants of aPKC substrates in previous
studies and found that they are indistinguishable from phosphorylated
substrates.[12]First, we tested how
phosphorylation of a serine residue affects phosphorylation of directly
neighboring sites (Figure 3A). The values of KM for SDA, DSA, ASD, and ADS were 14.4 ±
4.0, 5.9 ± 2.2, 7.9 ± 5.3, and 6.2 ± 1.4 μM and
the values of kcat 3.3 ± 0.4, 1.8
± 0.2, 0.7 ± 0.2, and 4.82 ± 0.4 s–1, respectively. The catalytic efficiencies were 0.23 ± 0.02,
0.31 ± 0.03, 0.09 ± 0.01, and 0.77 ± 0.22 μM–1 s–1, respectively. Compared to
SAA, SDA showed a 50% reduction in catalytic efficiency. The reduction
was attributed to a KM increase. Both
DSA and ASD showed a decrease in KM values
relative to that of ASA. However, the replacement of S656 with an
Asp increased kcat and the catalytic efficiency,
while the replacement of S664 decreased both values. Finally, ADS
showed an increase in its KM value, reducing
the phosphorylation rate compared to that of AAS. These data indicate
that prior phosphorylations on the direct neighboring sites reduce
the phosphorylation rates of S656 and S664. In contrast, the presence
of the Asp residue at the adjacent site had a favorable effect for
S660, which may indicate that the negative charges may be needed for
its efficient phosphorylation.
Figure 3
aPKC phosphorylation of Lgl is cooperative.
Phosphorylation rates
of individual Lgl sites are affected by the phosphorylation state
of neighboring sites (as assessed by phospho-mimetic residues). Error
bars represent the standard error. Panel A shows the effect of modification
at directly neighboring sites, while panel B shows the effect of more
distant modifications. Finally, panel C demonstrates the effect of
modifications at both of the other sites. The data show the phosphorylation
rates are cooperative but the effects differ depending on the positions
of the phospho-accepting residue and modified site(s). On the basis
of the results shown in panels A–C, phosphorylation primarily
occurs in the following order: S664 → S660 → S656.
aPKC phosphorylation of Lgl is cooperative.
Phosphorylation rates
of individual Lgl sites are affected by the phosphorylation state
of neighboring sites (as assessed by phospho-mimetic residues). Error
bars represent the standard error. Panel A shows the effect of modification
at directly neighboring sites, while panel B shows the effect of more
distant modifications. Finally, panel C demonstrates the effect of
modifications at both of the other sites. The data show the phosphorylation
rates are cooperative but the effects differ depending on the positions
of the phospho-accepting residue and modified site(s). On the basis
of the results shown in panels A–C, phosphorylation primarily
occurs in the following order: S664 → S660 → S656.We next examined how a phosphate
group influences the more distant
site using SAD and DAS peptides (Figure 3B).
Initial rate analyses showed that KM values
were 27.4 ± 9.5 and 3.7 ± 0.4 μM and the kcat values were 4.4 ± 0.9 and 3.4 ± 0.1 s–1, respectively. The catalytic efficiencies were 0.16
± 0.02 and 0.91 ± 0.23 μM–1 s–1, respectively. The effect of the Asp residue at position
P+8 was more pronounced than that at position P+4 for S656, for the KM value of SDA was 2 times higher than that
of SAA and the effect on kcat was minimal
while the KM value of SAD was 3 times
higher and the kcat 40% higher than those
of SAA. For DAS, on the other hand, the effect was more subtle, in
which kcat was reduced from the value
of AAS by 20% and there was almost no change in KM. Combined, the data show that a phospho-mimetic residue
at position P+8 influenced kcat, but KM was changed with a phospho-mimetic residue
at position P+4. These data indicate that proximal phosphorylation
at position P–8 or P+8 reduces catalytic efficiency.Finally, we examined how two phosphate groups affect the phosphorylation
of the remaining Ser residues using SDD, DSD, and DDSLgl peptides
(Figure 3C). The KM values were 26.4 ± 6.2, 2.5 ± 1.5, and 6.4 ± 1.1
μM and kcat values 2.0 ± 0.3,
0.5 ± 0.1, and 2.5 ± 0.14 s–1, respectively.
The catalytic efficiencies were 0.08 ± 0.01, 0.22 ± 0.01,
and 0.40 ± 0.05 μM–1 s–1, respectively. These data show that the presence of two Asp residues
decreases the rates of phosphorylation of S656 and S664 and increases
that of S660. These results indicate that S660 is more likely to be
phosphorylated after S656 and S664 are phosphorylated.All the
kinetic parameters measured showed that the replacement
of S660 with Asp resulted in increased KM values for S656 and S664. On the other hand, the presence of a phospho-mimetic
residue(s) was beneficial to S660. Taken together, the primary order
of phosphorylation is likely to be S664, S660, and then S656 followed
by a secondary pathway of S656, S664, and then S660.
L661F and E663K
Mutations Together Reduce the KM of the
ASA Peptide
Considering how similar
the sequences of the three Lgl phosphorylation subsites are, it was
surprising how aPKC presented clear preferences among them. We reasoned
that the residues in each subsite that do not match the consensus
sequence may not contribute significantly to the observed activity
differences. In this case, the differences in kinetic parameters between
S660 and S664 could originate from the residues surrounding the two
subsites.To investigate the basis for the subsite preference
within Lgl, we examined a series of mutations in the context of LglASA (Figure 4A). First, we noticed that ASA
peptide had a Glu residue at position P+3, while SAA and AAS peptides
had a Lys at the same position. The values of KM and kcat for the ASAE663K mutant
were 12.4 ± 3.6 μM and 1.7 ± 0.2 μM–1 s–1, respectively, indicating that replacement
of Glu with Lys at position P+3 does not affect the rate of ASA phosphorylation.
We also tested the ASAL661F mutant. Although the ASA mutant satisfies
the hydrophobic residue requirement at position P+1, both SAA and
AAS peptides had a Phe residue. The values for KM and kcat for ASAL661F were 10.7
± 2.0 μM and 2.5 ± 0.2 μM–1 s–1, respectively, suggesting that the substitution
of Lue with Phe at position P+1 did not affect KM but led to a 66% increase in kcat, compared to that of ASA. When the ASAL661F/E663K double mutant
was tested, the kcat value was 1.7 ±
0.1 μM–1 s–1 and comparable
to that of ASA, but the KM value was reduced
to 1.9 ± 0.7 μM. This was 6 times lower than that of ASA
and 2 times lower than that of AAS, implying that the those two residues
may play roles in binding affinity.
Figure 4
Ordered phosphorylations of aPKC. (A)
Critical recognition positions
that determine the KM for aPKC phosphorylation.
The L661F and E663K mutations together converted the KM of ASA to that of AAS. Error bars represent the standard
error. (B) Time course of wild-type Lgl phosphorylation as determined
by phospho-resolving gel electrophoresis. (C) Modeling of Lgl phosphorylation
by aPKC. The degree of phosphorylation was quantified using the data
from panel B overlaid with a simulation of wild-type Lgl phosphorylation
(solid lines) using the data measured in the previous sections.
Ordered phosphorylations of aPKC. (A)
Critical recognition positions
that determine the KM for aPKC phosphorylation.
The L661F and E663K mutations together converted the KM of ASA to that of AAS. Error bars represent the standard
error. (B) Time course of wild-type Lgl phosphorylation as determined
by phospho-resolving gel electrophoresis. (C) Modeling of Lgl phosphorylation
by aPKC. The degree of phosphorylation was quantified using the data
from panel B overlaid with a simulation of wild-type Lgl phosphorylation
(solid lines) using the data measured in the previous sections.We followed the concentration
of singly, doubly, and triply phosphorylated
Lgl to determine how well the kinetic parameters from each site could
predict bulk phosphorylation behavior. Using SDS–PAGE gels
containing Mn2+ and a Phos tag, we were able to resolve
each of the phosphorylated species (Figure 4B)
Discussion
Phosphorylation-coupled release of aPKC
substrates from the plasma
membrane is a central element of Par-mediated polarization. The mechanism
by which substrates are released from cortex, and in particular the
role of multisite phosphorylation, has been unclear, however. In the
case of the tumor suppressor Lgl, phosphorylation by aPKC is crucial
for not only asymmetric cell division but also epithelial cell polarity
and cell migration.[19−21] In this work, we have found that aPKC phosphorylation
of Lgl at each of its three phospho-sites is required for full displacement
from the cortex in a cultured S2 cell model system. Because multisite
phosphorylation is essential for cortical release, and therefore polarization,
we investigated the kinetics at each site and how phosphorylation
at one site influences others. We observed striking differences between
the kinetic parameters for each subsite. A mathematical model for
Lgl phosphorylation based on these parameters was able to predict
the overall rates of Lgl phosphorylation.
Multisite Phosphorylation
Is Coupled to the Cortical Release
of Lgl
We first addressed the relationship between the number
of phosphorylations and cortical localization of Lgl by expressing
various Lgl constructs in cultured DrosophilaS2
cells. We observed a general trend of an increasing level of cytoplasmic
Lgl with increasing levels of phosphorylation states, indicating an
additive effect of multisite phosphorylation on membrane interaction.
Similar behavior has been observed with another aPKC substrate, the
myristoylated alanine rich C kinase substrate (MARCKS). Phosphorylation
of three serine residues in MARCKS weakens its electrostatic attraction
for the membrane, resulting in translocation of MARCKS into the cytoplasm.[22−24] Multisite phosphorylation of aPKC substrates could be a general
mechanism for altering the electrostatic charges of the substrates
to regulate their membrane interactions in the cell. It is of interest
to determine whether multisite phosphorylation exhibits the same effects
on other aPKC substrates such as Miranda and Numb.
Phosphorylation
Order as a Regulatory Element for Cortical Displacement
We
examined whether phosphorylation of each serine residue was
equivalent and found that aPKC preferentially phosphorylates Lgl in
the following order: S664 > S656 > S660. This indicates that
the phospho-sites
are not equivalent. We also tested if phospho-sites interact with
one another and found that the effects of phosphorylation (using phospho-mimetic
residues as a proxy) depend on their position relative to the target
serine. For example, the presence of Asp at S656 increases the KM of adjacent sites. On the other hand, the
phospho-mimetic residue(s) decreased the KM for S660. Our data indicate the primary pathway for Lgl phosphorylation
is S664 → S660 → S656 while the secondary pathway is
S656 → S664 → S660. The differences in kinetic parameters
could determine how well fate determinants interact with the plasma
membrane (i.e., the association and dissociation rates). Additionally,
the order of phosphorylation may play a role in the availability of
the subsites when Lgl is bound to the membrane, as phosphorylation
could cooperatively release the membrane-bound subsite that otherwise
is not accessible to aPKC. The kinetic analyses of other aPKC substrates,
combined with localization assays, will be useful for a more generalized
understanding of the relationship between the number of phosphorylations
and cortical release behaviors.
Flexibility in the aPKC
Substrate Recognition Sequence
Substrate recognition is an
important aspect of substrate binding
and specificity. Though the three serine residues and the surrounding
amino acid sequences are similar to one another, aPKC showed a clear
preference among them, suggesting that the subtle difference in sequence
could have a large impact on kinetic parameters and substrate preference.
Lgl phosphorylation sites showed some deviation from the known consensus
amino acid sequence of aPKC substrates.[18,25,26] All Lgl peptides satisfied the requirement at positions
P–5, P–2, and P+1, while they all failed to match at
positions P–4 and P+2. Our data demonstrate that the mutation
of Leu to Phe at position P+1 slightly increased Vmax, suggesting that the larger hydrophobic residue interacts
more favorably with the kinase interaction surface. In contrast, mutation
of Glu to Lys at position P+3, thought to be critical for recognition,
did not influence the phosphorylation rate of S660. Taken together,
our findings suggest that the collective properties of the phospho-accepting
residue regions play a key role in preferential binding and efficient
catalysis. This could explain the range of amino acid requirements
seen in a single recognition site. Our study emphasizes the complexity
of substrate specificity and the flexibility of aPKC’s substrate
recognition mechanism.