| Literature DB >> 31508380 |
Ze-Xiang Wang1,2, Chun-Xue Zhou3, Guillermo Calderón-Mantilla4, Evangelia Petsalaki4, Jun-Jun He1, Hai-Yang Song1,5, Hany M Elsheikha6, Xing-Quan Zhu1.
Abstract
To gain insights into differences in the virulence among T. gondii strains at the post-translational level, we conducted a quantitative analysis of the phosphoproteome profile of T. gondii strains belonging to three different genotypes. Phosphopeptides from three strains, type I (RH strain), type II (PRU strain) and ToxoDB#9 (PYS strain), were enriched by titanium dioxide (TiO2) affinity chromatography and quantified using iTRAQ technology. A total of 1,441 phosphopeptides, 1,250 phosphorylation sites and 759 phosphoproteins were detected. In addition, 392, 298, and 436 differentially expressed phosphoproteins (DEPs) were identified in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains, in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS strains, and in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains, respectively. Functional characterization of the DEPs using GO, KEGG, and STRING analyses revealed marked differences between the three strains. In silico kinase substrate motif analysis of the DEPs revealed three (RxxS, SxxE, and SxxxE), three (RxxS, SxxE, and SP), and five (SxxE, SP, SxE, LxRxxS, and RxxS) motifs in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains, in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS, and in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains, respectively. This suggests that multiple overrepresented protein kinases including PKA, PKG, CKII, IKK, and MAPK could be involved in such a difference between T. gondii strains. Kinase associated network analysis showed that ROP5, ROP16, and cell-cycle-associated protein kinase CDK were the most connected kinase peptides. Our data reveal significant changes in the abundance of phosphoproteins between T. gondii genotypes, which explain some of the mechanisms that contribute to the virulence heterogeneity of this parasite.Entities:
Keywords: Toxoplasma gondii; genotype; iTRAQ; phosphoproteomics; tachyzoite
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31508380 PMCID: PMC6716450 DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2019.00307
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol ISSN: 2235-2988 Impact factor: 5.293
Figure 1Overall characteristics of the phosphoproteome of RH, PRU and PYS strains of Toxoplasma gondii. Distribution of phosphorylated residues and phosphorylation sites per peptide. (A) Distribution of phosphorylation on serine (pSer), threonine (pThr), and tyrosine (pTyr) for all phosphorylation sites. (B) Number of identified singly and multiply phosphopeptides. The majority of phosphopeptides have only one phosphorylation site. (C) Distribution of 759 phosphoproteins based on identification of single or multiple phosphosites per protein. The number of proteins with multiple phosphosites decreases with increasing the number of phosphosites.
Figure 2Repeatability assessment of phosphopeptides quantification based on Coefficient of variation (CV) in RH vs. PRU, PRU vs. PYS, PYS vs. RH. The percentage on X-axis represents the values of CV. The left y-axis indicates the number of phosphopeptides and the right y-axis indicates the cumulative percentage of phosphopeptides. (A–C) Represent repeatability assessment of RH vs. PRU, PRU vs. PYS, PYS vs. RH, respectively.
Figure 3Volcano plots showing the median phosphopeptides log2 fold change plotted against the –log10 P-value. The results highlight the phosphopeptides up/down-regulated in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains (A), in PRU when comparing PRU/PYS strains (B), and in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains (C), respectively. Red and green circles represent upregulated and downregulated DEPs, respectively. Dotted lines indicate (±) 1.5-fold change.
Figure 4Hierarchical clustering heat maps of differentially expressed phosphoproteins (DEPs). Expression values of DEPs were log1.5-transformed. (A–C) Represent heat maps of phosphoproteins up/down-regulated in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains, in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS strains, and in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains, respectively.
The description of the phosphorylation motifs identified by Motif X analysis.
| 1. | .R.S.D…. | 26.42 | 44 | 1,080 | 2,478 | 715,183 | 11.76 |
| 2. | …….SPR…. | 30.84 | 62 | 1,036 | 4,743 | 712,705 | 8.99 |
| 3. | ….R.S.G…. | 23.82 | 50 | 974 | 4,147 | 707,962 | 8.76 |
| 4. | ….R.SP…… | 22.98 | 42 | 924 | 3,846 | 703,815 | 8.32 |
| 5. | ….R.S.E…. | 22.95 | 38 | 882 | 3,781 | 699,969 | 7.98 |
| 6. | …….SD.E…. | 32.00 | 61 | 844 | 2,551 | 696,188 | 19.72 |
| 7. | ….G.SP…… | 31.95 | 45 | 783 | 3,680 | 693,637 | 10.83 |
| 8. | ….R.S……. | 16.00 | 139 | 738 | 41,026 | 689,957 | 3.17 |
| 9. | …….SP…… | 16.00 | 120 | 599 | 52,860 | 648,931 | 2.46 |
| 10. | …….S.E…. | 16.00 | 91 | 479 | 35,368 | 596,071 | 3.20 |
| 11. | …….SD…… | 16.00 | 58 | 388 | 20,383 | 560,703 | 4.11 |
| 12. | …….S.E…. | 13.68 | 58 | 330 | 30,604 | 540,320 | 3.10 |
| 13. | ……GS……. | 12.68 | 53 | 272 | 32,034 | 509,716 | 3.10 |
| 14. | ….H.S……. | 8.09 | 22 | 219 | 10,813 | 477,682 | 4.44 |
| 15. | …….S.G…. | 6.69 | 35 | 197 | 31,938 | 466,869 | 2.60 |
| 16. | ……DS……. | 6.49 | 23 | 162 | 18,142 | 434,931 | 3.40 |
| 17. | …….TP…… | 16.00 | 45 | 112 | 24,257 | 326,403 | 5.41 |
No. 1–16 represent the serine phosphorylation motifs; No. 17 represents the threonine phosphorylation motif; phosphorylation sites were determined by Motif-X.
The height of each amino acid represents the frequency of this residue occurring at the position of pS/pT.
Figure 5Phosphorylation-specific motif analysis using the Motif-X algorithm. The representations of the serine phosphorylation motifs identified from all unambiguous phosphorylation sites are depicted as sequence logos. The height of the residues represents the frequency with which they occur at the respective positions. The color of the residues represents their physicochemical properties. Arrows pointing up or down on the right of each motif denotes that the motif was up-regulated or down-regulated, respectively.
Types of kinases represented by the 17 motifs listed in Table 1 as determined by KinasePho.
| R.S.D | PKA, PKB, PKG, CKI, CKII, IKK, CaM-II, ATM, CDC2 |
| SPR | PKB, IKK, ATM, CDC2, CDK, MAPK |
| R.S.G | PKA, PKB, PKC, PKG, CKI, CaM-II, IKK, ATM, CDC2 |
| R.SP | PKA, PKB, PKG, CaM-II, IKK, ATM, CDC2, CDK, MAPK |
| R.S.E | PKA, PKB, PKG, CKI, CKII, IKK, ATM |
| SD.E | PKG, CKI, CKII, ATM |
| G.SP | IKK, ATM, CDC2, CDK, MAPK |
| R.S | PKA, PKB, PKC, PKG, CKI, CKII, IKK, CaM-II, ATM |
| SP | PKB, PKG, IKK, ATM, CDC2, CDK, MAPK |
| S.E | PKG, CKI, CKII, ATM |
| SD | PKA, PKG, CKI, CKII, ATM |
| S.E | PKA, PKG, CKI, CKII, IKK, ATM |
| GS | PKA, PKG, CKII, IKK, CaM-II, ATM |
| H.S | PKA, CKI, ATM, CDC2, MAPK, |
| S.G | PKC, PKG, CKI, CKII, IKK, ATM, CDC2 |
| DS | CKI, CKII, ATM |
| TP | PKA, CDC2, CDK, MAPK |
PKA, cAMP-dependent protein kinase; PKB, protein kinase B; PKC, protein kinase C; PKG, cGMP-dependent protein kinase; CKI, casein kinase I; CKII, casein kinase II; IKK, IkappaB kinase; CaM-II, calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II; ATM, ataxia telangiectasia mutated kinase; CDC2, cell division cycle protein kinase p34; CDK, cyclin-dependent kinase; MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase.
Figure 6GO analysis of phosphoproteins up/down-regulated in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains. The X-axis indicates the number of DEPs. The Y-axis represents GO terms of (A) upregulated and (B) downregulated phosphoproteins in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains, respectively.
Figure 8GO analysis of phosphoproteins up/down-regulated in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains. The X-axis indicates the number of DEPs. The Y-axis represents GO terms of (A) upregulated and (B) downregulated phosphoproteins in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains, respectively.
Figure 7GO analysis of phosphoproteins up/down-regulated in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS strains. The X-axis indicates the number of DEPs. The Y-axis represents GO terms of (A) upregulated and (B) downregulated phosphoproteins in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS strains, respectively.
Figure 9KEGG pathway analysis of differentially expressed phosphoproteins (DEPs) in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains, in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS strains, and in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains. The vertical axis shows the significantly enriched KEGG pathways and the horizontal axis represents the rich factors corresponding to the pathways. Rich factor refers to the ratio of the number of DEPs to the number of all phosphoproteins in the pathway. Higher Rich factors indicate greater degrees of enrichment. The size and color of the node represent number of phosphoproteins and p-value of pathways. The scatter plots represent KEGG pathways of the DEPs in (A) RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains, (B) in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS strains, and (C) in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains, respectively.
Figure 10Interaction network (combined score > 0.7) of the identified phosphoproteins up/down-regulated in RH strain when comparing RH/PRU strains. The nodes represent phosphoproteins and the edges denote interactors between phosphoproteins. The upregulation and downregulation of phosphoproteins were characterized by the color and size of nodes. Red and large size nodes denote up-regulated phosphoproteins in RH, whereas green and small size nodes indicate down-regulated phosphoproteins in RH. The color of edge represents the combined score of interactors.
Figure 11Interaction network of the phosphoproteins up/down-regulated in PRU strain when comparing PRU/PYS strains. Nodes represent phosphoproteins and edges denote interactors between phosphoproteins. The upregulation and downregulation of phosphoproteins were characterized by the color and size of nodes. Red and large size nodes represent up-regulated phosphoproteins in PRU, whereas green and small size nodes denote down-regulated phosphoproteins in PRU. The color of edge represents the combined score of interactors.
Figure 12Interactions network of the phosphoproteinsup/down-regulated in PYS strain when comparing PYS/RH strains. Nodes represent phosphoproteins and edges denote interactors between phosphoproteins. The upregulation and downregulation of phosphoproteins were characterized by the color and size of nodes. Red and large size nodes represent up-regulated phosphoproteins in PYS, whereas green and small size node denote down-regulated phosphoproteins in PYS. The color of edge represents the combined score of interactors.