| Literature DB >> 31467409 |
Michal Zigo1,2, Pavla Manaskova-Postlerova3,4, Vera Jonakova3, Karl Kerns5, Peter Sutovsky5,6.
Abstract
Ubiquitination is a stable, reversible posttranslational modification of target proteins by covalent ligation of the small chaperone protein ubiquitin. Most commonly ubiquitination targets proteins for degradation/recycling by the 26S proteasome in a well-characterized enzymatic cascade. Studies using human and non-human mammalian spermatozoa revealed the role of the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS) in the regulation of fertilization, including sperm-zona pellucida (ZP) interactions as well as the early events of sperm capacitation, the remodeling of the sperm plasma membrane and acrosome, and for the acquisition of sperm fertilizing ability. The present study investigated the activity of UPS during in vitro capacitation of fresh boar spermatozoa in relation to changes in sperm proteome. Parallel and sequential treatments of ejaculated and capacitated spermatozoa under proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions were used to isolate putative sperm proteasome-associated sperm proteins in a compartment-specific manner. A differential proteomic approach employing 1D PAGE revealed differences in accumulated proteins at the molecular weights of 60, 58, 49, and 35 kDa, and MS analysis revealed the accumulation of proteins previously reported as proteasome co-purifying proteins, as well as some novel proteins. Among others, P47/lactadherin, ACRBP, ADAM5, and SPINK2 (alias SAAI) were processed by the proteasome in a capacitation dependent manner. Furthermore, the capacitation-induced reorganization of the outer acrosomal membrane was slowed down in the presence of proteasomal inhibitors. These novel results support the proposed role of UPS in sperm capacitation and open several new lines of inquiry into sperm capacitation mechanism.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31467409 PMCID: PMC6715765 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-49024-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Flow cytometric and Western blot analysis of sperm in vitro capacitation. (A) In spermatozoa labeled with an anti-phosphotyrosine antibody, increased protein tyrosine phosphorylation is documented by the shift of the mean fluorescence intensity in capacitated spermatozoa (A”) compared to ejaculated spermatozoa (A’). (B) Western blot detection of protein tyrosine phosphorylation in non-reducing and reducing conditions respectively showed unique bands in capacitated spermatozoa regardless of proteasomal inhibition. (C) Western blot detection of proacrosin/acrosin conversion in non-reducing and reducing conditions respectively is represented by the decrease of the molar mass of inactive proacrosin (55–53 kDa) in ejaculated spermatozoa to 49, 35 and 25 kDa of active α-, β-, and γ- acrosin, respectively. Proteasomal inhibition at any level neither affected protein tyrosine phosphorylation nor proacrosin/acrosin conversion. Flow cytometry results are presented as mean ± SD of four representative replicates, including the appropriate vehicle and negative controls. Every flow cytometric run represents 10,000 events. Due to the proclivity of target proteins to run differentially, Western blots were performed under both non-reducing and reducing conditions and replicated three times with comparable results. Residual gels after electrotransfer were stained with CBB to show comparable protein loads per well (Fig. S3).
Figure 2(A) Flow cytometric measurements of the outer acrosomal membrane (OAM) remodeling during in vitro capacitation under the proteasomal activity permissive (green)/inhibiting (red) conditions with vehicle (orange) and non-capacitated (ejaculated, yellow) control. Fresh, non-fixed spermatozoa were used and labeled with lectin PNA (peanut agglutinin). 0.2% (v/v) DMSO was used as a vehicle for both mild (10 μM epoxomicin + 10 μM MG132) and strong (100 µM MG132) proteasome inhibiting conditions. Four sperm populations with intact acrosomes were distinguished and gated; the representative epifluorescence images of each population are shown in panel B. Population gating and comparisons revealed that populations 1, 2, and 3 differ significantly (P < 0.05, marked red) when compared to vehicle control, depending on proteasomal inhibition during capacitation. Results are presented as mean ± SD of four independent replicates, including the appropriate vehicle and negative controls. Every flow cytometric run represents 10,000 events.
Figure 3(A) Flow cytometric measurements of lactadherin MFGE8 redistribution during in vitro capacitation under proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions (10 µM epoxomicin + 10 µM MG 132 for mild inhibiting conditions, and 100 µM MG132 for strong inhibiting conditions) and vehicle controls, combined with epifluorescence imaging of lactadherin localization in the ejaculated (B) and capacitated spermatozoa (B’). Every flow cytometric run represents 10,000 events. (C) Western blot detection of lactadherin MFGE8 in the ejaculated and capacitated spermatozoa under proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions (100 μM MG132) including vehicle control, with densitometric analysis; (C’) the PVDF membrane stained with CBB after chemiluminescence detection shows comparable protein loads per lane, (C”) residual gel after electrotransfer for protein normalization purposes. Proteins were extracted with 1% TrX-100, resolved on a 4–20% gradient gel under reducing conditions, and 20 μg of protein was loaded per single lane. Results are presented as mean ± SD of four independent replicates. Differences in proteasomal inhibition with statistical significance (P < 0.05), when compared to vehicle control, are highlighted in red.
Figure 6(A) Flow cytometric measurements of sperm associated acrosin inhibitor (SPINK2) processing during in vitro capacitation under the proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions (10 µM epoxomicin + 10 µM MG 132 for mild inhibiting conditions, and 100 µM MG132 for strong inhibiting conditions) and vehicle control, combined with epifluorescence imaging of SPINK2 labeling in signature 1 sperm population (B) and signature 2 sperm population (B’). Every flow cytometric run represents 10,000 events. Differences between treatments were observed, but there was no statistical significance (P > 0.05). (C) Western blot detection of SPINK2 extracted with 1% TrX-100 from ejaculated and capacitated sperm under proteasome permissive/inhibiting (100 μM MG132) conditions including vehicle control; (C’) PVDF membrane stained with CBB after chemiluminescence detection shows comparable protein loads per lane; (C”) residual gel after electrotransfer for protein normalization purposes. Full-length blot at different exposure times is presented in supplemental data as Fig. S16. (D) Western blot detection of SPINK2 in sequentially isolated proteins from ejaculated and capacitated sperm with proteasome permissive/inhibiting (10 μM epoxomicin +10 μM MG132 in 0.2% DMSO) conditions and vehicle control; (D’) PVDF membrane stained with Ponceau S after electrotransfer for protein normalization purposes. Full-length blot is presented in supplemental data as Fig. S17. For both C and D, proteins were resolved on a 4–20% gradient gel under reducing conditions, and 20 μg of protein was loaded per single lane. Results are presented as mean ± SD of four independent replicates.
Figure 4(A) Flow cytometric measurements of ACRBP accumulation (immature precursor protein and N-terminal part of the ACRBP degradation products were immunolabeled) during in vitro capacitation with proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions (10 µM epoxomicin +10 µM MG 132 for mild inhibiting conditions, and 100 µM MG132 for strong inhibiting conditions) and vehicle controls, combined with epifluorescence imaging of ACRBP N-terminus in the sperm population with lower fluorescence intensity (B), and gated on sperm population with ACRBP accumulated in the midpiece region (B’). Every flow cytometric run represents 10,000 events. Differences in proteasomal inhibition with statistical significance (P < 0.05), when compared to vehicle control, are highlighted in red. (C) Western blot detection of ACRBP in the ejaculated and capacitated spermatozoa under proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions (100 μM MG132) including vehicle control, with highlighted (red arrows) 61 and 54 kDa doublet of the immature ACRBP precursor protein; (C’) PVDF membrane stained with CBB after chemiluminescence detection shows comparable protein loads per lane, (C”) residual gel after electrotransfer for protein normalization purpose. Proteins were extracted with 1% TrX-100, resolved on a 4–20% gradient gel under reducing conditions, and 20 μg of protein was loaded per single lane. Results are presented as mean ± SD of four independent replicates.
Figure 5(A) Flow cytometric measurements of ADAM5 redistribution/accumulation during in vitro capacitation under proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions (10 µM epoxomicin + 10 µM MG 132 for mild inhibiting conditions, and 100 µM MG132 for strong inhibiting conditions) and vehicle control, combined with epifluorescence imaging of ADAM5 localization in ejaculated (B) and capacitated spermatozoa (B’). Every flow cytometric run represents 10,000 events. (C) Western blot detection of ADAM5 in ejaculated and capacitated spermatozoa under proteasome permissive/inhibiting (100 μM MG132) conditions including vehicle control, with densitometric analysis; (C’) PVDF membrane stained with CBB after chemiluminescence detection shows comparable protein loads per lane; (C”) residual gel after electrotransfer for protein normalization purposes. Proteins were extracted with 1% TrX-100, resolved on a 4–20% gradient gel under reducing conditions, and 20 μg of protein was loaded per single lane. Results are presented as mean ± SD of four independent replicates for flow cytometry and three independent replicates for Western blotting. Statistically significant differences (P < 0.05), when compared to vehicle control, are highlighted in red.
Figure 7The SDS-PAGE resolved proteins obtained by parallel (A) and sequential (B) sperm extraction in a compartment-specific manner from ejaculated and in vitro capacitated spermatozoa under proteasome permissive/inhibiting conditions (10 μM epoxomicin + 10 μM MG132), including vehicle control (0.2% (v/v) DMSO). Among extraction reagents, n-octyl-β-D-glucopyranoside (OBG), and radioimmunoprecipitation assay (RIPA) buffer were used. Four bands (#1–4), highlighted in red rectangles, were found to be differentially accumulated during capacitation under proteasome inhibiting conditions and were subjected to mass spectrometric (MS) analysis. Bands 5 and 5′ were also found to be accumulated, but not analyzed by MS. Proteins were resolved on a 4–20% gradient gel under reducing conditions, and protein equivalent of 50 million spermatozoa was loaded per single lane. The experiment was done in two replicates; representative electrophoretograms are shown for both parallel and sequential treatments.
Summary of MS/MS protein identification analysis of four bands (#1–4) from Fig. 7, found to be differentially accumulated during capacitation under proteasome inhibiting conditions.
| Protein annotation | NCBI gi # | HUGO name (Symbol) | Aliases | Ion Score | % Coverage | Nominal MW (kDa) | Protein score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Lactadherin precursor | 172072653 | milk fat globule-EGF factor 8 protein (MFGE8) | BA46, EDIL1, hP47, HsT19888, “lactadherin”, MFG-E8, OAcGD3S, SED1, “sperm surface protein hP47” | 738 | 36 | 49.0 | 1159 |
| Acrosin precursor (EC 3.4.21.10) | 97535584 | acrosin (ACR) | “acrosin light and heavy chain prepropeptide”, “preproacrosin” | 346 | 24 | 46.0 | 642 |
| Predicted: Cathepsin F isoform X1 (EC 3.4.22.41) | 335281454 | cathepsin F (CTSF) | CATSF, CLN13 | 310 | 16 | 54.7 | 295 |
|
| |||||||
| Lactadherin precursor | 172072653 | milk fat globule-EGF factor 8 protein (MFGE8) | BA46, EDIL1, hP47, HsT19888, “lactadherin”, MFG-E8, OAcGD3S, SED1, “sperm surface protein hP47” | 324 | 22 | 49.0 | 207 |
| Malate dehydrogenase precursor (EC 1.1.1.37) | 164541 | malate dehydrogenase 1 (MDH1) | “malate dehydrogenase 1, NAD (soluble)” | 223 | 23 | 32.2 | 187 |
| Beta-Acrosin, chain A (EC 3.4.21.10) | 11513874 | acrosin (ACR) | “acrosin light and heavy chain prepropeptide”, “preproacrosin” | 210 | 18 | 29.7 | 287 |
| Predicted: zona pellucida-binding protein 2 isoform X1 | 545858201 | zona pellucida binding protein 2 (ZPBP2) | MGC41930, ZPBPL | 195 | 19 | 38.0 | 81 |
|
| |||||||
| Predicted: Cytosol aminopeptidase (EC 3.4.11.1) | 927165791 | leucyl and cystinyl aminopeptidase (LNPEP) | Leucyl aminopeptidase, Cytosol aminopeptidase, CAP, “cystinyl aminopeptidase”, IRAP, P-LAP, “placental leucine aminopeptidase”, PLAP | 508 | 34 | 56.4 | 452 |
| Tubulin beta-4b chain | 335281298 | tubulin beta 4B class IVb (TUBB4B) | Beta2, “class IVb beta-tubulin” | 285 | 17 | 50.3 | 331 |
| Predicted: membrane cofactor protein-like | 350588758 | CD46 molecule pseudogene 1 (CD46P1) | “CD46 molecule, complement regulatory protein pseudogene”, “CD46 molecule, complement regulatory protein pseudogene 1”, CD46P, MCPL, “membrane cofactor protein-like (CD46-like, trophoblast-lymphocyte cross-reactive antigen-like)” | 271 | 19 | 49.6 | 421 |
| Dihydrolipoyl dehydrogenase, mitochondrial precursor (EC 1.8.1.4) | 47522940 | dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase (DLD) | “dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase (E3 component of pyruvate dehydrogenase complex, 2-oxo-glutarate complex, branched chain keto acid dehydrogenase complex)”, Glycine cleavage system L protein, GCSL, LAD, dihydrolipoyl dehydrogenase, LDP-Glc, LDP-Val, dehydrolipoate dehydrogenase, diaphorase, dihydrolipoamide:NAD + oxidoreductase, dihydrolipoic dehydrogenase, dihydrothioctic dehydrogenase, lipoamide dehydrogenase (NADH), lipoamide oxidoreductase (NADH), lipoamide reductase, lipoamide reductase (NADH), lipoate dehydrogenase, lipoic acid dehydrogenase, lipoyl dehydrogenase, protein-6-N-(dihydrolipoyl)lysine:NAD + oxidoreductase | 238 | 14 | 54.7 | 217 |
| ATP synthase subunit alpha, mitochondrial | 297591975 | ATP synthase, H + transporting, mitochondrial F1 complex, alpha subunit 1, cardiac muscle (ATP5A1) | ATP5A, ATP5AL2, ATPM, hATP1, OMR, ORM | 284 | 14 | 59.8 | 188 |
|
| |||||||
| ATP synthase subunit alpha, mitochondrial | 297591975 | ATP synthase, H + transporting, mitochondrial F1 complex, alpha subunit 1, cardiac muscle (ATP5A1) | ATP5A, ATP5AL2, ATPM, hATP1, OMR, ORM | 575 | 22 | 59.8 | 570 |
| Mitochondrial aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 (EC:1.2.1.3) | 187370719 | aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 family (mitochondrial) (ALDH2) | ALDH class 2, ALDH-E2, ALDHI | 394 | 17 | 57.3 | 247 |
| Predicted: cytosol aminopepdidase (EC 3.4.11.1) | 927165791 | leucyl and cystinyl aminopeptidase (LNPEP) | Leucyl aminopeptidase, Cytosol aminopeptidase, CAP, “cystinyl aminopeptidase”, IRAP, P-LAP, “placental leucine aminopeptidase”, PLAP | 284 | 17 | 56.4 | 254 |
| Predicted: alpha aminoadipic semialdehyde dehydrogenase (EC:1.2.1.3) | 927105880 | aldehyde dehydrogenase 7 family member A1 (ALDH7A1) | “26 g turgor protein homolog”, “alpha-AASA dehydrogenase”, “alpha-aminoadipic semialdehyde dehydrogenase”, “antiquitin 1”, Betaine aldehyde dehydrogenase (EC:1.2.1.8), “delta1-piperideine-6-carboxylate dehydrogenease”, EPD, “P6c dehydrogenase”, PDE | 272 | 10 | 59.0 | 309 |
| Tubulin beta-4b chain | 335281298 | tubulin beta 4B class IVb (TUBB4B) | Beta2, “class IVb beta-tubulin” | 252 | 17 | 50.3 | 252 |
For the search against NCBInr Mammalian protein database, an individual MS/MS Ion Score > 44 indicated identity or extensive homology, P < 0.05. The total ion score for a protein assignment is the sum of all the highest statistically significant ion scores for matched peptide MS/MS. Only the top three to five matches with the highest statistical credibility per individual band are shown. Relative protein abundances, within each band, are represented as protein score.