| Literature DB >> 27484902 |
Sha Sun1, Li Lv2, Zhi Yao2, Purnima Bhanot3, Junjie Hu1,4, Qian Wang5.
Abstract
Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27484902 PMCID: PMC4980331 DOI: 10.1007/s13238-016-0290-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Protein Cell ISSN: 1674-800X Impact factor: 14.870
Figure 1Identification of Plasmodium ER-shaping proteins. (A) Sequence alignment of P. berghei YOP1 (PbYOP1) and S. cerevisiae Yop1p (ScYop1p). Residues are numbered; identical residues are indicated by asterisks and similar residues by dots. The first transmembrane segment is highlighted in cyan, the second in green, and the predicted C-terminal amphipathic helix in orange. (B) Topology diagrams of three ER tubule-forming proteins identified in the P. berghei genome. Lipid bilayers are shown in gray, the first transmembrane segment in cyan, and the second one in green. The length of each transmembrane segment and loop is shown in proportion to the predicted length. (C) Domain diagrams of P. berghei SEY1 (PbSEY1) and S. cerevisiae Sey1p (ScSey1p). Domain boundaries are labeled. TM, transmembrane segment; CT, C-terminal tail. (D) Topology diagram of PbSEY1. The domains are colored as in (C)
Figure 2Functional tests of PbYOP1 and PbSEY1. (A) Purified PbYOP1-HA (residues 39–186) was analyzed by SDS-PAGE and coomassie staining. SDS-resistant dimers are indicated by asterisks. Molecular marker is shown in kDa. (B) PbYOP1-HA was mixed with E. coli polar lipids in Foscholine-12 and the detergent removed with Bio-beads over 4 h. The proteoliposomes were analyzed by negative stain EM. The right panel shows the sample with lipid only. Scale bar = 200 nm. (C) As in (B), but with PbYOP1 lacking the C-terminal amphipathic helix (residues 39–170). (D) Sucrose gradient centrifugation of reconstituted PbYOP1 treated with the indicated detergents. PbYOP1-HA in 1% digitonin (top panel), 1% Triton X-100 (middle panel), or 1% SDS (bottom panel) was loaded onto a sucrose step gradient. After centrifugation for 2 h at 25°C, fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting with HA antibodies. Detergent-resistant dimers are indicated by asterisks. (E) A RFP targeted to the ER lumen (ss-RFP-HDEL) was expressed in wild type (wt) or sey1Δ yop1Δ yeast cells. The localization of the protein was determined by fluorescence microscopy focusing at the center or periphery of the cells. Empty vector or indicated SEY1s were also expressed. The ER morphology was determined by counting at least 100 cells for each sample. The results are representative of at least three repetitions. Scale bar = 2 μm. (F) Indicated SEY1s expressed in sey1Δ yop1Δ cells were determined by anti-HA immunoblotting. PGK was used as a loading control. (G) ATLs-deleted COS-7 cells (DKO) were transfected with HA-tagged SEY1s. The ER morphology of indicated cells was visualized using calreticulin, an endogenous luminal ER protein, with indirect immunofluorescence and confocal microscope, and categorized as “normal” or “abnormal”. A total of 80–100 cells were counted for each sample. All graphs are representative of three repetitions. Scale bar = 10 μm. (H) ATL2, ATL3, and SEY1s levels were determined by immunoblotting. Actin was used as a loading control