The PAR2 signal peptide prevents premature receptor cleavage and activation.

Unlike closely related GPCRs, protease-activated receptors (PAR1, PAR2, PAR3, and PAR4) have a predicted signal peptide at their N-terminus, which is encoded by a separate exon, suggesting that the signal peptides of PARs may serve an important and unique function, specific for PARs. In this report, we show that the PAR2 signal peptide, when fused to the N-terminus of IgG-Fc, effectively induced IgG-Fc secretion into culture medium, thus behaving like a classical signal peptide. The presence of PAR2 signal peptide has a strong effect on PAR2 cell surface expression, as deletion of the signal peptide (PAR2ΔSP) led to dramatic reduction of the cell surface expression and decreased responses to trypsin or the synthetic peptide ligand (SLIGKV). However, further deletion of the tethered ligand region (SLIGKV) at the N-terminus rescued the cell surface receptor expression and the response to the synthetic peptide ligand, suggesting that the signal peptide of PAR2 may be involved in preventing PAR2 from intracellular protease activation before reaching the cell surface. Supporting this hypothesis, an Arg36Ala mutation on PAR2ΔSP, which disabled the trypsin activation site, increased the receptor cell surface expression and the response to ligand stimulation. Similar effects were observed when PAR2ΔSP expressing cells were treated with protease inhibitors. Our findings indicated that there is a role of the PAR2 signal peptide in preventing the premature activation of PAR2 from intracellular protease cleavage before reaching the cells surface. The same mechanism may also apply to PAR1, PAR3, and PAR4.

Introduction

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a class of 7 transmembrane domain cell surface receptors and consist of the largest receptor family in mammals and other organisms. They are involved in the signal transduction of almost every system in human physiology, including the sensory, metabolic, endocrine, immune, and the nervous systems. Unlike many other cell surface receptors that have a classical signal peptide to lead the proteins to cells surface, the majority of GPCRs (>90%) do not have a signal peptide [1]. In general, class B receptors such as the secretin receptor [2], corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) receptors [3], the Glucagon receptor [4], and Glucagon-like peptide receptors [5] and the class C GPCRs, such as metabotropic glutamate receptors [6], GABA receptors [7], and adhesion GPCRs [8],which have relatively large N-terminal extracellular domains are more likely to have signal peptides than class A receptors (). It is hypothesized that the presence of the signal peptide helps the large hydrophilic N-terminus to cross the plasma membrane. Most class A GPCRs do not have classical signal peptides. It is believed that the first transmembrane domain of these class A GPCRs serves as a signal anchor sequence allowing these receptors to translocate to the cell membrane after translation and assembly in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) [9]. Protease-activated receptors (PARs), including PAR1, PAR2, PAR3, and PAR4 belong to class A GPCR receptor sub-family [10]. Homology-wise, they are very closely related to cysteinyl leukotriene receptors (CYSLT), niacin receptors (GPR109), lactic acid receptor (GPR81), and the succinate receptor (GPR91). Unlike their closest neighbors (), which do not possess a signal peptide, all PARs have a predicted signal peptide at their N-termini (). Genomic analyses show, in contrast to their closest neighbors that are all encoded by single exon genes, PARs have an additional exon encoding only the signal peptides (), suggesting that these signal peptides may play a specific role for PARs. In this report, we used PAR2 to study the importance of the signal peptide in PAR receptor function and localization.

PAR receptors are unique group of receptors in the Class A subfamily.

A. Examples of GPCR subfamily members and signal peptide possession. The signal peptide regions in Class B and C are shown in red. B. PAR receptors and their closest neighbors, grouped by sequence similarity. C. The N-terminal amino acid sequence of PAR1-4. The signal peptides are shown in blue. Each PAR receptor is encoded by 2 exons. The protein regions coded by the first exons are underlined. The Arg residues involved in receptor cleavage and activation are shown in red.

Materials and methods

Reagents

The PAR2 agonist peptide ligand, SLIGKV, was synthesized by Innopep, Inc. (San Diego, CA). Trypsin (sequencing grade), thrombin, and protease inhibitors were purchased from Sigma Aldrich (St. Louis, MO).

Quantitative PCR analysis of the mRNA expression levels of PARs

Total RNAs were isolated from COS7, HEK293, and CHO-K1 cells respectively using a RNA isolation kit (RNeasy Mini Kit) from Qiagen. cDNAs were synthesized from the isolated RNA using a cDNA synthesis kit (Advantage RT-PCR kits) from Clontech (Mountain View, CA). Specific primers designed according to human, monkey, and hamster PAR1, PAR2, PAR3, and PAR4 were used to quantify each mRNA expression using a qPCR machine (QuantStudio, ABI) as described [11]. In parallel, primers for β-actin were used to amplify β-actin cDNA as the internal controls. The relative expressions of different PAR mRNAs were normalized using the expression level of β-actin. The qPCR primers were designed based on the published cDNA sequences and the primer sequences are listed in .

Generation of PAR1, PAR2 double knock-out cell line

A PAR1, PAR2 double knock-out HEK293 cell line was created by Applied StemCells (Milpitas, CA) using a CRISPR/Cas9 approach. Briefly, the coding region (nucleotide 374–643) of PAR1, which encodes the protein region TM2 to TM3 of PAR1, was deleted. Similarly, the coding region (281–627) of PAR2, which encodes the protein region TM2 to TM3 of PAR2, was deleted. Single cell clones were isolated. PCR analysis of the genomic DNA by PCR followed by DNA sequencing were used to confirm the deletion of the DNA fragments.

Molecular cloning of PAR2 constructs

The PAR2 coding region was amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using primers (5’ atg tct GAA TTC GCC ACC atg cgg agc ccc agc gcg gcg tgg ctg ctg -3’; reverse primer: 5’- atg tct GCG GCC GCt caa tag gag gtc tta aca gtg gtt gaa ct-3’) designed based on the published PAR2 coding sequence (Genbank Accession No. NM_005242.5). Human colon cDNA purchased from Clontech (Palo Alto, CA) was used as the template. Expanded high fidelity PCR system (Roche Life Science, Indianapolis, IN) was used to amplify the full length PAR2 cDNA coding region. The resulting DNA was digested using EcoR1 and Not1 restriction enzymes (Promega, Madison, WI) and then cloned into pcDNA3.1 (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). The insert region was then sequenced by Eton Biosciences (San Diego, CA) and the identity of the entire coding region was confirmed.

Expression constructs for PAR2 with an Arg36Ala mutation (PAR2(R36A)), PAR2 without the signal peptide (PAR2ΔSP), PAR2ΔSP with an Arg36Ala mutation (PAR2ΔSP(R36A)), and PAR2 without the signal peptide and the tethered ligand (PAR2ΔSPΔL) were generated by site directed mutagenesis using overlapping PCR approach [12].

Genes for PAR2 with the signal peptide coding regions replaced by the insulin signal peptide, or the insulin receptor signal peptide were synthesized by Eton Biosciences. Similarly, expression constructs for various PAR2 variant with a GFP fused to the C-termini, human IgG-Fc coding region with or without a PAR2 signal peptide coding region, with an insulin, or with an insulin receptor signal peptide coding region were synthesized. The genes were cloned into pcDNA3.1 and the entire coding regions were sequenced to confirm the identities.

Intracellular Ca2+ mobilization assay

FLIPR-Tetra (Molecular Device, San Jose, CA) was used to monitor intracellular Ca2+ mobilization in HEK293 cells, HEK293 cells with PAR1 and PAR2 double knocked-out, and cells transiently transfected with various PAR2 expression constructs. Cells were grown in 96-well polyD-lysine coated black FLIPR plates (Corning) in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS, 1 mM pyruvate, 20 mM HEPES, at 37°C with 5% CO2. For transient transfection, cells were grown in 96-well polyD-lysine coated black FLIPR plates and transfected using FuGENE HD (Promega, Madison, WI) as the transfection reagent according to the manufacturer’s instructions. For samples treated with protease inhibitors, protease cocktail was added to cell culture one day after transfection and incubated overnight. Two days after transfection, cell culture media were removed, and cells were washed using HBSS buffer plus 20 mM HEPES. Ca2+ dye (Flura 3) diluted in HBSS buffer plus 20 mM HEPES was used to incubate cells at RT for 40 min to allow Ca2+ to enter cells. Intracellular Ca2+ mobilization stimulated by various concentrations of ligands (trypsin, or peptide ligand) was monitored by FLIPR-Tetra as described [13]. The untransfected cells were used as negative controls.

Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the measurement of IgG-FC secretion

COS7 cells were grown in 6 well plates with DMEM supplemented with 10% FCS, 1 mM pyruvate, 20 mM HEPES, at 37°C with 5% CO2 and transfected by different expression constructs for human IgG-Fc with various signal peptide coding regions using LipofectAmine (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) as the transfection reagent according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Untransfected cells were used as negative controls.

To measure the secreted human IgG-Fc in the medium, one day after transfection, the cells were washed 3 times using PBS and then cultured in serum free DMEM plus 1 mM pyruvate and 20 mM HEPES. Three days after transfection, the conditioned media from the transfected cells were harvested and centrifuged at 10,000 g at 4°C for 20 min to remove the cell debris. 50 μl of the conditioned medium from each transfection was incubated in one well of a 96-well ELISA plate (UltraCruz® ELISA Plate, high binding, 96-well, Flat bottom, Santa Cruz Biotechnology) at 37°C for 1 hr to allow protein in the media to adsorb to the plates. The plates were washed 3 times using PBS + 0.1% Tween-20 (PBST) and blocked using 3% no-fat milk in PBST for 30 min at RT and then incubated using HRP-conjugated goat-anti-human IgG-Fc antibody (50 ng/ml) diluted in 3% no-fat milk in PBST at 4°C overnight. The plates were washed 3 times using PBST and then developed using an ELISA developing kit (BD Biosciences). The optical densities at 450 nm were read using an ELISA plate reader (Molecular Devices).

To measure intracellular IgG-Fc protein, one day after transfection, cells were trypsinized and seeded in 96-well culture plates (30,000 cell/well) and grown in DMEM supplemented with 10% FCS, 1 mM pyruvate, 20 mM HEPES. Three days after transfection, the media were removed, and cells were washed using PBS, and then fixed by 10% formaldehyde in PBS at RT for 15 min. The cells were penetrated using 1% Triton-X-100 at RT for 10 min and blocked using 3% no-fat milk in PBST for 30 min at RT. The cells were then incubated using HRP-conjugated goat-anti-human IgG-Fc antibody and the plate was developed and read as described above.

Immuno-fluorescent staining of intracellular IgG-Fc

COS7 cells were transfected with various IgG-Fc expression constructs. One day after transfection, cells were trypsinized and seeded in a 4-well cell culture chamber slides (Stellar Scientific, Baltimore, MD) (60,000 cells/well). Three days after transfection, the media were removed, and cells were washed using PBS, and then fixed by 10% formaldehyde in PBS at RT for 15 min. The cells were penetrated using 1% Triton-X-100 at RT for 10 min and blocked using 3% no-fat milk in PBST for 30 min at RT. The cells were then incubated using FITC-labelled goat-anti-human IgG-Fc antibody (ThermoFisher Scientific) (200 ng/ul) diluted in 3% no-fat milk in PBST at 4°C overnight. The slides were then washed 3 times using PBST and then dried using cool air and viewed under a fluorescent microscope.

Identification of the signal peptide cleavage site of PAR2

COS7 cells were grown in 15 cm dishes in DMEM supplemented with 10% FCS, 1 mM pyruvate, 20 mM HEPES, at 37°C with 5% CO2 and transfected by the expression construct of human IgG-Fc with the N-terminus of PAR2 using LipofectAmine. One day after transfection, the cells were washed 3 times using PBS and then cultured in serum free Opti-MEM (Life Technology) plus Pen/Strep. Three days after transfection, the media were collected and centrifuged to remove the cell debris. The supernatants were passed through a Protein A (Sigma) affinity column. The column was washed with PBS and eluted using 0.1 M Glycine/HCl (pH 2.8) and then neutralized using 1 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0. The eluted protein was first treated with PNGase-F (Promega) to remove the N-linked glycosylation and then analyzed by mass spectrometry to determine the N-terminal sequence. Protein sequencing was performed using a generic in-solution protein digestion and LC-MS/MS method. Briefly, a 10 μl protein sample in 50 mM ammonia bicarbonate buffer (pH 7.8) was reduced by 11.3 mM dithiothreitol at 60°C for 30 min (without urea), alkylated with 37.4 mM iodoacetamide (RT, 45 min), and then digested with 0.2 μg Trypsin (37°C, overnight). LC/MS analysis was carried out on an Agilent 1290 UHPLC coupled to a 6550 qTOF mass spectrometer, under the control of MassHunter software version 4.0. Chromatography was run with an Agilent AdvanceBio Peptide Map column (2.1 x 100 mm, 2.7 μm) using water/acetonitrile/0.1% formic acid as mobile phases, and mass spectrometric data were acquired in both MS and MSMS modes.

Protease inhibitor treatment of cells recombinantly expressing PAR2 receptors

The wild type and various mutant PAR2 variant expression constructs were transiently transfected into HEK293 cells with par1 & par2 genes knocked-out. 24 hrs after transfection, cells were treated for 12 hrs with a protease inhibitor cocktail including 4-(2-aminoethyl)benzenesulfonyl fluoride hydrochloride (AEBSF, 500 μM), Leupeptin (50 μM), aprotinin (50 μM).

Measurement of the total and cell surface expression of PAR2 by ELISA

ELISA was used to measure the total and cell surface PAR2 protein expression. The wild type and different mutant PAR2 variants were transiently expressed in HEK293 cells with the endogenous PAR1 and PAR2 knocked-out. The cells were transfected in 10 cm cell culture dishes and, 24 hr after transfection, split into 96-well polyD-lysine coated plate. 48 hr post transfection, cells were fixed as described above. To measure the total PAR2 expression, the fixed cells were penetrated using 1% triton-X-100, and blocked with 3% no-fat milk, and then incubated with a monoclonal antibody [3 μg/ml, mouse anti-human PAR2 (BioLegand, San Diego, CA)], which recognizes the N-terminal region (amino acid residues 37–62) of the human PAR2, at 4°C overnight. The plate was washed with cold PBS 3 times and then incubated using a HRP-conjugated goat-anti-mouse IgG secondary antibody (30 ng/ml, Pierce) at RT for 1 hr. The plate was washed again using PBS and developed using an ELISA developing kit as described above. To measure the cell surface PAR2 expression, the ELISA assays were performed in the same manner as the total PAR2 measurement without using triton-X-100 as the cell penetrating agent.

Measurement of the total expression and cellular localization of PAR2-GFP fusion proteins

GFP fusion proteins of PAR2 wild type and various mutants were transiently expressed in 96-well poly-D-lysine plates in HEK293 cells with the endogenous PAR1 and PAR2 knocked-out as described above in methods for Intracellular Ca mobilization assay.

48 hrs after transfection, the media were aspired, and cells were fixed using 4% Paraformaldehyde in PBS (Sigma). The fluorescent intensities of the cells were read using an Envision plate reader (PerkinElmer). The fixed cells were then analyzed using a confocal microscopy for PAR2 cellular localizations.

Results and discussions

PAR2 signal peptide behaves as a classical signal peptide

PAR2 signal peptide leads IgG-Fc fragment secretion to the medium

A classical signal peptide is typically found at the N-termini of either secreted proteins (such as insulin) or cell surface proteins (such as insulin receptor). It typically consists of a stretch of 20–30 hydrophobic amino acid residues. Its known function is to help a secreted or a cell surface protein to target to the ER during protein translation and cross the plasma membrane. PAR2 has a predicted signal peptide sequence at its N-terminus and we hypothesized that it may function as a classical signal peptide. To address this, we devised a few expression constructs () to test whether the signal peptide of PAR2 enables the secretion of human IgG-Fc fragment (which lacks a signal peptide) into the cell culture medium. IgG-Fc was used since it was easy to detect using ELISA or immunofluorescence-staining. When recombinantly expressed in mammalian cells, without a signal peptide, IgG-Fc is only expressed intracellularly. In contrast, with a signal peptide, IgG-Fc can be secreted into the cells culture medium. One IgG-Fc construct contained the N-terminus of PAR2 with its signal peptide (PAR2, ) and another with the PAR2 N-terminus in which its signal peptide was deleted (PAR2ΔSP, ). As positive controls, constructs with an insulin signal peptide (a secreted protein signal peptide, IN, ) or an insulin receptor signal peptide (a cell surface receptor signal peptide, IR, ) fused to human IgG-Fc were also used in the experiment. We used immuno-staining () and ELISA () to detect and measure IgG-Fc expression in the transfected cells and demonstrated that all cells transfected with various IgG-Fc expression constructs expressed IgG-Fc. Consistent with our hypothesis, our results showed that fusing the N-terminus of PAR2 with its signal peptide to the human IgG-Fc, effectively led to the secretion of IgG-Fc to the medium, thus functioning similarly to that of the insulin signal peptide or the insulin receptor signal peptide (). In contrast, fusing the PAR2 N-terminus without its signal peptide failed to lead to the secretion of IgG-Fc into the medium () despite clear IgG-Fc protein expression in cells ().

Fig 2

PAR2 signal peptide behaves like a classical signal peptide.

A. Expression constructs for testing the role of the signal peptide of PAR2 in leading IgG-Fc secretion. The N-terminus of PAR2 with its signal peptide (PAR2), the N-terminus of PAR2 without the signal peptide (PAR2ΔSP), the N-terminus of insulin (IN), and the N-terminus of insulin receptor (IR) are fused to the human IgG-Fc fragment respectively. The signal peptide regions of PAR2, insulin, and insulin receptor are highlighted in red and underlined. Human IgG-Fc fragment is highlighted in green. B, C. Detection of IgG-Fc expression in cells by immuno-fluorescent staining and ELISA. COS7 cells expressing various IgG-Fc fusion proteins as indicated were fixed, penetrated using detergent, and then stained by FTIC-labeled fluorescent antibodies (B) or detected by ELISA (C). For ELISA, samples are performed in quadruplicates and the results are shown in mean ± sd. Statistical analysis (One-Way ANOVA) shows that, compared with the control, NC, PAR2 (** p = 0.0019), PAR2ΔSP (* p = 0.0249), IN (** p = 0.0024), and IR (** p = 0.0038). D. Detection of IgG-Fc secretion into media by ELISA. Serum free conditioned medium from COS7 cells expressing various IgG-Fc fusion proteins with different N-termini, including PAR2 N-terminus (PAR2), PAR2 N-terminus without the signal peptide (PAR2ΔSP), the N-terminus of insulin (IN), and the N-terminus of insulin receptor (IR). Untransfected cells were used as the negative control (NC). Samples are performed in quadruplicates and the results are shown in mean ± sd. Statistical analysis (One-Way ANOVA) shows that, compared with the control, NC, except PAR2ΔSP (ns, p = 0.9997), PAR2, IN, and IR all showed great amount of secreted IgG-Fc protein (**** p <0.0001), All experiments have been performed 3 times and very similar results have been observed. Example data is shown.

PAR2 signal peptide is cleaved from the mature protein

It has been reported that for the CRF2(a) receptor, the signal peptide may not be cleaved from the mature proteins following membrane insertion [14]. To determine if this is the case for the PAR2 signal peptide, we examined whether the signal peptide of PAR2 is cleaved from the mature IgG-Fc protein with the PAR2 N-terminus following secretion. The conditioned medium from the COS7 cells transfected with the expression construct for PAR2 N-terminus fused to IgG-Fc () was collected. Secreted PAR2-IgG-Fc fusion protein was affinity purified, glycosylation moieties removed, and then analyzed by mass spectrometric (MS) protein sequencing. Our results showed that the most N-terminal sequence that matches PAR2 sequence is TIQGTNR (), suggesting that the signal peptide has been cleaved following the protein secretion, with the cleavage site being between residues Gly24 and Thr25. Interestingly, a variant sequence TIQGTDR was also observed. This sequence differs from TIQGTNR by one residue (from N to D). Since the residue Asn30 is a part of a NRS sequence (a N-linked glycosylation site, ) and glycosylated Asn residues are converted to Asp after de-glycosylation by PNGase-F, our results suggest that at least part of the expressed protein is glycosylated at this N-linked glycosylation site.

Determination of the N-terminal sequence of PAR2 mature protein.

The N-terminal extracellular region of PAR2 is fused to the N-terminus of IgG-Fc. The predicted signal peptide of PAR2 is shown in red and underlined. The IgG-Fc region is shown in green. The potential N-linked glycosylation site, NRS, is underlined. The protein is expressed in COS7 cells and affinity purified. The N-terminus of the purified protein was determined by MS sequencing after trypsin digestion. Two sequences have been observed: TIQTNR and TIQTDR representing unglycosylated and glycosylated PAR2 N-termini.

PAR2 signal peptide is important for PAR2 receptor functional expression and activation by its ligands

Generation of a PAR1 & PAR2 knock-out HEK293 cell line for recombinant expression and characterization of the PAR2 receptor

To evaluate the receptor localization and function of recombinant PAR2, it is essential to have a host mammalian cell line that does not express endogenous PAR2 or other PAR receptors. We tested a few commonly used mammalian cells for recombinant expression, including HEK293, CHO-K1, and COS7 cells and found that all three cell lines express relatively high PAR1 and PAR2 mRNA (). In addition, in functional assays, they all responded to PAR1 and PAR2 ligands (thrombin and trypsin, respectively) (). Since the presence of naturally expressed PAR1 and PAR2 in these host cells would complicate the characterization of the recombinantly expressed PAR2, we created a HEK293 cell line (which does not express PAR3 and PAR4) with both par1 and par2 genes knocked-out by CRISPR/cas9 (). Pharmacological characterization of this cells line demonstrated that the loss of both par1 & par2 led to a lack of responses to PAR1 ligand (thrombin) or PAR2 ligand (trypsin) stimulation (). These cells were then used to study expression and localization of recombinant PAR2.

CHO-K1, COS7, and HEK293 cells express PAR1 and PAR2 receptors.

A. CHO-K1, COS7, and HEK293 cells naturally express high levels of PAR1 and PAR2 mRNA but express little or no PAR3 and PAR4 mRNA. qPCR analysis was used to quantify the mRNA expression. Specific primers for each of PAR1, PAR2, PAR3, and PAR4, were used to quantify the respective mRNA expression using cDNA made from each cell line as the templates. β-actin primers were used to quantify β-actin mRNA expression as the internal controls. The relative mRNA expression of PAR1, PAR2, PAR3, and PAR4 were first normalized using β-actin expression, and then normalized using the PAR1 expression level in CHO-K1 cells, which is arbitrarily set as 100%. The relative expressions of other genes are represented as percentage of PAR1 mRNA level in CHO-K1 cells. The results shown are mean ± sd (n = 3). Statistical analysis (One-Way ANOVA) shows that compared with the mRNA expression of PAR4, which is undetectable in these cells, CHO cells express high levels of mRNAs for PAR1 (** p = 0.0037), PAR2 (* p = 0.023), and PAR3 (* p = 0.035); COS7 and HEK293 cells express high level of mRNAs for PAR1 (** p = 0.0029, * p = 0.032, respectively) and PAR2 (** p = 0.0013, ** p = 0.0027, respectively) without expressing detectable PAR3 and PAR4 mRNAs. B, C, D. CHO-K1, COS7, and HEK293 cells naturally express PAR1 and PAR2 receptors and respond to thrombin (PAR1 ligand) and trypsin (PAR2 ligand) stimulations. FLIPR assays were used measure receptor activation as indicated by intracellular Ca2+ mobilization. Relative fluorescent units (RFU) are the readout for fluorescent intensities for Ca2+ mobilization signals. Various concentration of thrombin or trypsin were used as the ligands to activation the receptors. The assays were performed in triplicates at each data point and mean ± sd are shown. E. Sequencing analysis of the genomic DNA from par1 & par2 knock out HEK293 cells. The results show that a 270 bp deletion in par1 gene and a 347 bp deletion in par2 gene have been achieved. The deletions removed the coding regions from TM2 to TM3 for both PAR1 and PAR2 proteins. The vertical lines indicate the deletion sites. F. Characterization of par1 & par2 knock-out HEK293 cells. FLIPR assays were used to characterize receptor activation as indicated. Wild type HEK293 cells were used as the positive control. The assays were performed in triplicates at each data point and mean ± sd are shown.

Deletion of the signal peptide reduced the functional expression of PAR2, which can be rescued by a replacement signal peptide

To assess the functional role of the PAR2 signal peptide, we made a few modifications to the PAR2 N-terminus, including a N-terminal deletion to remove the signal peptide (PAR2ΔSP) and the replacement of the PAR2 signal peptide with an insulin signal peptide (PAR2-INSP), or an insulin receptor signal peptide (PAR2-IRSP) (). Pharmacological characterization of the modified receptors using FLIPR assay () showed that the recombinantly expressed PAR2 responds to trypsin (EC50 = 1.5 nM) and PAR2 agonist peptide (PAR2-AP) (EC50 = 50 nM) with much higher sensitivity compared to the endogenously expressed PAR2 in HEK293 cells (EC50 = 10 nM for trypsin and EC50 = 1.5 μM for PAR2-AP). This is likely due to the over-expression of the recombinant receptor displaying increased apparent potency of the ligand to the receptor [15]. When receptor expression level is very low, an increase of receptor expression often leads to increased maximum response (Emax value). However, when receptor expression level exceeds certain value, which is often true for recombinantly expressed receptors, the Emax value will not increase further due to reaching the capacity of the cell signal transduction. In contrast, increased receptor expression will lead to the increased apparent potency. In this case, the EC50 value is a good indicator of the relative number of receptors at the cell surface. Compared to the cells expressing the wild type PAR2, cells expressing PAR2 without its signal peptide demonstrated dramatically reduced sensitivity to both trypsin and PAR2-AP (EC50 for trypsin: 50 nM; EC50 for PAR2-AP: 5.8 μM), suggesting the signal peptide is an important component of PAR2 functional cell surface expression. Supporting this hypothesis, replacement of the PAR2 signal peptide either with a signal peptide from insulin or from the insulin receptor fully restored the receptor ligand sensitivity (

A signal peptide is important for functional expression of PAR2.

A. schematic diagram showing the modifications to PAR2 receptor. The N-terminal extracellular sequences of various PAR2 mutants are shown. Human PAR2 wild type (PAR2), PAR2 with the signal peptide deleted (PAR2ΔSP), PAR2 with an insulin signal peptide (PAR2-INSP) and an insulin receptor signal peptide (PAR2-IRSP). The native signal peptide of PAR2 is shown in blue. The insulin and insulin signal peptides are shown in green and purple respectively. The tether ligand sequence of PAR2 (SLIGKV) is highlighted in yellow. B, C. Characterization of PAR2 mutants in FLIPR assay using trypsin or the synthetic PAR2 agonist peptide (PAR2-AP) as the ligands. Expression constructs for PAR2 wild type receptor and various modifications were cloned into pcDNA3.1 and transiently expressed in HEK293 cells with par1 and par2 knocked-out. Various concentrations of trypsin (B) or PAR-AP (C) were added to stimulate the intracellular Ca2+ mobilization. Relative fluorescent intensity units (RFU) are shown. The experiments were performed in triplicates at each data point and the results shown are mean ± sd. HEK293 cells with par1 and par2 genes knocked-out were used as the host cells for recombinant expression of various PAR2 receptors. Untransfected cells were used as the negative controls (NC). The experiments have been performed 3 times and very similar results have been observed. Example data is shown.

The presence of the tethered ligand is the reason that PAR2 needs the signal peptide

Further deletion of the tethered ligand region rescues the functional expression of PAR2 without the signal peptide

PARs are activated by proteases, which generate new N-termini and expose the tethered peptide ligands present in the N-terminal extracellular regions of the receptors. This unique receptor activation mechanism, combined with the fact that signal peptide-less PAR2 has a poor response to ligand stimulation, led us to speculate that the necessity of the signal peptide for PAR2 may be related to the presence of tethered ligand. We made a signal peptide-less PAR2 mutant with a further deletion to the region of the tethered ligand (PAR2ΔSPΔL) (). This mutant receptor lacks the signal peptide and the tethered ligand sequence (SLIGKV) and is not activated by trypsin, however it can be fully activated by the synthetic agonist peptide PAR2-AP similarly to the wild type PAR2 receptor in the FLIPR assay (). This suggests that further deletion of the tethered ligand sequence (SLIGKV) restored functional cell surface expression of PAR2 without the signal peptide. The results also suggest that, without a signal peptide, PAR2 may be susceptible to unintended intracellular protease activation, leading to poor functional cell surface expression.

Further deletion of the tethered ligand rescues the functional expression of PAR2 without the signal peptide.

A. schematic diagram showing the modifications to PAR2 receptor. The N-terminal extracellular sequences of various PAR2 mutants are shown. Human PAR2 wild type (PAR2), PAR2 with the signal peptide deleted (PAR2ΔSP), PAR2 with the signal peptide deletion and with further deletion to the tether ligand region (PAR2ΔSPΔL). The signal peptide of PAR2 is shown in blue. The tether ligand sequence of PAR2 (SLIGKV) is highlighted in yellow. B, C. Characterization of mutant PAR2 receptors using FLIPR assays. Various PAR2 expression constructs were transiently expressed in HEK293 with par1 and par2 knocked-out. Trypsin (B) or the synthetic agonist peptide PAR2 ligand (PAR2-AP) (C) were used as the ligand to stimulate receptor activation. HEK293 cells with par1 and par2 genes knocked-out were used as the host cells for recombinant expression of various PAR2 receptors. Untransfected cells were used as the negative controls (NC). The experiments were performed in triplicates at each data points and the results shown are mean ± sd. The experiments have been performed 3 times and very similar results have been observed. Example data is shown.

Mutation of Arg36 to Ala, which blocks the trypsin activation site, increased the functional expression of PAR2 without the signal peptide

Trypsin activates PAR2 by cleaving the protein after residue Arg36. This process generates a new N-terminus (with sequence SLIGKV—), which serves as a tethered ligand to activate the receptor. Mutating Arg36 to Ala prevents the trypsin cleavage at this position, and therefore blocks trypsin-mediated receptor activation. We made a mutation at the Arg36 position on PAR2 without the signal peptide (PAR2ΔSP(R36A)) and tested whether this mutation changes the level of functional receptor expression. In parallel, we also made the same mutation on the full length PAR2 receptor (PAR2(R36A)) and characterized these receptors in FLIPR assays after stimulation with trypsin or PAR2-AP. Our results demonstrated that the Arg36Ala mutation blocked, as expected, trypsin activation of PAR2 without the signal peptide (). However, when the PAR2-AP was used as the ligand, the mutant receptor (PAR2ΔSP(R36A)) demonstrated a much higher sensitivity to PAR2-AP compared to that of PAR2ΔSP (). As a control, we made the same mutation in full length PAR2 receptor (PAR2(R36A)), which responded to trypsin stimulation very poorly (), responded to PAR2-AP stimulation almost identically to the full length PAR2 receptor (). The small but detectable activation of PAR2(R36A) by trypsin () could be due to the cleavage of PAR2 by trypsin at Arg31, or Lys34 positions, resulting in tethered ligands with poor activity for receptor activation.

Arg36 to Ala mutation helps the functional expression of PAR2 without a signal peptide.

A. schematic diagram showing the modifications/mutations to PAR2 receptor. The N-terminal extracellular sequences of various PAR2 mutants are shown. PAR2 wild type (PAR2), PAR2 with a Arg36 mutation to Ala (PAR2(R36A)), PAR2 with the signal peptide deleted (PAR2ΔSP), PAR2 with the signal peptide deletion and with an Arg36Ala mutation (PAR2ΔSP(R36A)) were used for characterizations. The signal peptide of PAR2 is shown in blue. The tether ligand sequence of PAR2 (SLIGKV) is highlighted in yellow. The mutation Ala residue from Arg36, which is involved in trypsin cleavage/activation of PAR2, is highlighted in red. The mutant receptors were characterized in FLIPR assays using either trypsin (B) or PAR2-AP (C) as ligands. HEK293 cells with par1 and par2 genes knocked-out were used as the host cells for recombinant expression. Untransfected cells were used as the negative controls (NC). The experiments were performed in triplicates at each data points and the results shown are mean ± sd. The experiments have been performed 3 times and very similar results have been observed. Example data is shown.

Protease inhibitor treatment increased functional expression of PAR2 without the signal peptide

We hypothesized that serine protease inhibitors can help the functional expression of PAR2 without a signal peptide by blocking premature intracellular protease-mediated activation. A protease cocktail including AEBSF, Leupeptin, and aprotinin was used to inhibit ER and Golgi proteases [16, 17]. Cells expressing the wild type PAR2 and various mutant forms of PAR2 were treated with the protease inhibitor cocktail and then tested for their responses to PAR2-AP stimulations. Trypsin was not used in this assay because it is inhibited by the protease inhibitor cocktails. Our results showed that while protease inhibitors did not affect the EC50 values of PAR2-AP stimulated responses for PAR2 wild type, PAR2(R36A), PAR2ΔSP(R36A), and PAR2ΔSPΔL, the protease cocktail clearly increased functional expression of PAR2ΔSP by decreasing the EC50 value (from 5.8 μM to 0.7 μM) ().

Serine protease inhibitor cocktail increases the functional expression of PAR2 without the signal peptide.

HEK293 cells with par1 and par2 knocked out were used for the transient expression of various PAR2 proteins. Treatment with proteases inhibitor cocktail (PI) lowered the Emax values for all receptors with similar degrees. Protease treated samples showed about 80% response in Emax values compared with those of untreated cells. For good comparison of the EC50 values between samples treated and untreated with the protease inhibitor cocktails, the results were normalized using their Emax values and the data were expressed as the percentages of the Emax. The experiments were performed in triplicates at each data points and the results shown are mean ± sd. The experiments have been performed 3 times and very similar results have been observed. Example data is shown.

Arg36Ala mutation and the protease inhibitor treatment increase the cell surface expression of signal peptide-less PAR2

To confirm whether the reduced responses of signal peptide-less PAR2 to the ligand stimulation is due to a lack of total receptor protein expression, and/or a lack of cell surface expression, we used a monoclonal antibody against the amino acid residues 37–62 of PAR2 in ELISA assays to measure the total and cell surface expression of the various forms of PAR2 and effect of protease inhibitor treatment. We observed that PAR2 wild type and PAR2(R36A) mutants have the highest total and cell surface protein expression as measured by ELISA. PAR2ΔSPΔL has slightly lower expression compared to that of the PAR2 wild type in both total and cell surface expression. As this variant of PAR2 is missing amino acid residues 1–42, its reduced detection of proteins expression could be due to the poor antibody recognition. PAR2ΔSP(R36A) has further lower total and cell surface expression and PAR2ΔSP has the lowest total and particularly cell surface expression levels (). The data showed that the great majority of PAR2ΔSP protein are located intracellularly and only a small portion of it are present on the cell surface. For PAR2 wild type, PAR2(R36A), and PAR2ΔSPΔL, over 90% of the proteins are presented on the cell surface. Corroborating the functional assays, protease inhibitor treatments increased the total and especially the cell surface expression levels for PAR2ΔSP while having little or no effects on the protein expression of other forms of PAR2 proteins (). Stimulation of receptors using PAR2 peptide ligand (PAR2-AP) decreased the cell surface and the total protein expression levels for all variants of PAR2 except PAR2ΔSP. This is likely due to that the majority of PAR2ΔSP being intracellular, and the ligand stimulation of the cell surface receptor, causing the subsequent internalization and degradation of the stimulated receptors applies less to PAR2ΔSP.

Cell surface and total protein expression of PAR2 wild type and mutants.

HEK293 cells with par1 and par2 knocked-out were used for the transient expression of various PAR2 proteins. PAR2 peptide ligand (PAR2-AP) and protease inhibitor cocktails (PI) were used for treatments. Medium (Medium) was used as the control treatment. ELISA with or without cell penetrating reagent was used to measure the total and cell surface and protein expression. The experiments were performed in triplicates at each data points and the results shown are mean ± sd. Statistical analysis (One-Way ANOVA) showed that, for both cell surface and total proteins, compared with PAR2, PAR2ΔSP, PAR2ΔSP(R36A), and PAR2ΔSPΔL have lower protein expressions (**** p < 0.0001). Compared with PAR2ΔSP, PAR2ΔSP(R36A) has much higher protein expression ($ $ $ $ p < 0.0001). Except for PAR2ΔSP, PAR2-AP decreased protein expressions for all others (#### p < 0.0001). Protease inhibitor cocktails (PI) only increased the protein expression for PAR2ΔSP (++++ p < 0.0001) and did not affect the protein expressions for others. The experiments have been performed 3 times and very similar results have been observed. Example data is shown.

In parallel, to further facilitate the measurements of the protein expression and visualization of protein cellular localizations, we constructed various PAR2 expression vectors by fusing a GFP tag to the C-termini of the PAR2 wild type protein and the various PAR2 mutants () and expressed them in the par1 and par2 null HEK293 cell line. We measured the total expression levels of PAR2 and the mutant proteins by measuring GFP fluorescence intensity of the various GFP fusion proteins. In general, the results are very similar to that shown by ELISA using the anti-PAR2 antibody except for PAR2ΔSPΔL, which showed lower levels compared to that of PAR2 wild type in the ELISA assays, but showed similar expression levels to that of PAR2 wild type in GFP intensities (). This result supports our earlier speculation that the reduced detection of PAR2ΔSPΔL expression is likely due to the poor recognition of PAR2ΔSPΔL (which misses the amino acid residues 37–42 of the recognition site) by the antibody. To investigate the cellular localizations of PAR2 protein and its variants, we used confocal microscopy to analyze the cells that express various PAR2 proteins at various conditions including the treatments with PAR2 ligand or protease inhibitors. PAR2 wild type, PAR2(R36A), and PAR2ΔSPΔL proteins are mainly localized on the plasma membranes (). PAR2ΔSP can only be found intracellularly and little or none is on the plasma membranes, which is very similar to PAR2 wild type receptor stimulated by the peptide ligand (PAR2+PAR2-AP, For PAR2ΔSP(R36A), a good portion of protein is expressed on the plasma membrane and a large amount of protein can also be found intracellularly. Interestingly, protease inhibitor treatment enabled the plasma membrane expression of PAR2ΔSP (PAR2ΔSP+PI, Overall, the observed GFP-tagged protein cellular distribution is in agreement with the ELISA data (). Interestingly, the cells expressing PAR2ΔSP(R36A) and protease inhibitor-treated cells expressing PAR2ΔSP appeared to belong two subcategories. One population of cells have good PAR2 plasma membrane localization, mimicking the wild type PAR2, and another population of cells only have intracellular PAR2 which is similar to that of PAR2ΔSP without the protease inhibitor treatment. Arg36Ala mutation and the protease inhibitor cocktails (used in the assays) mainly block PAR2 cleavage/activation by the serine proteases. However, cells may express other proteases that can cleave and activate PAR2ΔSP intracellularly but would not be blocked by the mutation or the protease inhibitor treatment. It is possible that cells express different proteases under different conditions such as different cell cycle stages [18-25].

Arg36Ala mutation and protease inhibitors increase the cell surface expression of PAR2-GFP without a signal peptide.

A. Schematic presentation of various PAR2-GFP fusion protein expression constructs. B. The expression levels of various PAR2-GFP proteins with treatments of PAR2-AP, or protease inhibitors. Various PAR2-GFP expression constructs were transiently expressed in HEK293 cells with par1 & par2 knocked-out. The transfected cells were treated either with medium (Medium), peptide agonist (PAR2-AP), or a protease inhibitor cocktails (PI), and the fluorescent intensities of the cells expressing the PAR2-GFP fusion proteins were measured. Assays were performed in quadruplicates at each data point and the results shown are mean ± sd. Statistical analysis (One-Way ANOVA) showed that compared with PAR2, PAR2ΔSP and PAR2ΔSP(R36A) have lower protein expressions (**** p < 0.0001). Compared with PAR2ΔSP, PAR2ΔSP(R36A) has much higher protein expression ($ $ $ $ p < 0.0001). Except for PAR2ΔSP, PAR2-AP decreased protein expressions for all others (#### p < 0.0001). Protease inhibitor cocktails (PI) only increased the protein expression for PAR2ΔSP (++++ p < 0.0001) and did not affect the protein expressions for others. C. Fluorescent images from confocal microscope showing the cellular distributions of various PAR2-GFP fusion proteins under the treatments of PAR2-AP or protease inhibitors. Untransfected cells were used as the negative control (NC). The fluorescent intensities shown in the images are automatically adjusted for better viewing of the protein cellular distributions. The experiments have been performed 3 times and very similar results have been observed. Example data is shown.

GPCRs are synthesized in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and transported to the Golgi apparatus and then to the plasma membrane. There are many proteases present in the endoplasmic reticulum and Golgi apparatus [16, 26–29] which may cleave the protease-sensitive PAR2 activation site at Arg36 position during the protein synthesis and transportation process. This would cause unintended or premature receptor activation, which would subsequently lead to receptor internalization and degradation. The signal peptide of PAR2 is important for its functional expression. However, the removal of the tethered ligand or the blockage of the receptor activation by proteases dismissed the necessity of the signal peptide, suggesting that the signal peptide may help prevent this unintended cleavage of PAR2 at the activation site during the protein synthesis and/or transportation process. For cell surface proteins using signal peptides, their translocation to ER and eventually the plasma membrane is mediated by signal peptide recognition particles/ER translocons [30, 31], which play roles in protein compartmentalization [32-36] and segregation [31, 37, 38]. Although the mechanism remains unclear, we speculate that ER translocons may play the role in protecting PAR2 from protease cleavage (). It’s known that the signal peptides for secreted and cell surface proteins are cleaved and removed upon entering ER. However, it’s still possible that the signal peptide recognition complex (or part of the complex) may still bind these proteins such as PAR2, serving as a physical blockade for proteases. Protein compartmentation and segregation also make it possible to keep proteins like PAR2 separated from proteases during the transporting process from ER to the cell surface.

Schematic diagram showing the proposed role of PAR2 signal peptide in protecting PAR2 from protease cleavage before reaching the plasma membrane.

Without the signal peptide, the protease activation site of PAR2 is susceptible to protease cleavage in ER and Golgi, leading to PAR2 activation before reaching the cell surface and subsequent translocation to lysosome for degradation. With the signal peptide, PAR2 is bound by the signal peptide related translocon complex and segregated/protected from the cleavage by ER/Golgi proteases, allowing the receptor to reach the plasma membrane for sensing the extracellular trypsin activation. The signal peptide of PAR2 at the N-terminus is shown in red.

The classical signal peptide has been known to help secreted proteins and cell surface proteins to cross or become embedded in the cell membranes. In this report, through studying the signal peptide of PAR2, we observed a function of the signal peptide to serve as a protector of PAR2 from intracellular protease activation. Based on the high sequence similarities among the PARs and their similar activation mechanisms, the signal peptides for PAR1, PAR3, and PAR4 may also serve the same function as that of PAR2. Cleavage of PARs by intracellular proteases leads to the unintended activation of the receptors and the loss of function to sense the extracellular signals. Therefore, with the protease-protection function, the signal peptides are critical for the functions of the PAR family of receptors. However, thinking from a different angle, a PAR2 receptor without a signal peptide, if naturally exist, may be activated by proteases in endoplasmic reticulum or Golgi apparatus, leading to receptor activation without the extracellular proteases and achieving a raised tone of the cells for certain physiological status. A blast search of NCBI GenBank showed that there is a single submission (XM_017009223.1) encoding a PAR2 without the signal peptide, suggesting that it remains a possibility that a natural PAR2 without the signal peptide may exist.

Summary

To summarize, in this report we observed that deletion of the signal peptide of PAR2 decreased PAR2 cell surface expression with the most receptors accumulating intracellularly. However, further deletion of the tether ligand of PAR2, which disables the activation of PAR2 by trypsin, restored the receptor cell surface expression, suggesting that the necessity of the signal peptide for PAR2 is related to the presence of the tether ligand sequence and the protease activation mechanism. We hypothesize that the signal peptide of PAR2 protects PAR2 from intracellular protease cleavage and activation. Without the signal peptide, PAR2 can be cleaved and activated by intracellular proteases in the endoplasmic reticulum or Golgi apparatus, leading to the unintended, premature receptor activation and resulting in intracellular accumulation. Supporting this hypothesis, an Arg36Ala mutation at the trypsin activation site as well as protease inhibitor treatments both increased the cell surface expression of the signal peptide-less PAR2 and functional responses to ligand stimulation. Our results extend the knowledge of PAR2 expression/function and reveal a role of the signal peptide in protecting cells surface protein, and perhaps the secreted proteins as well, from intracellular protease cleavages.

4 Dec 2019

PONE-D-19-23622

The PAR2 signal peptide prevents premature receptor cleavage and activation

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Liu,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Your manuscript has been reviewed by two referees who are recognized exoerts in this field. Both reviewers made reasonable recommendations that you should carefully consider in order to revise your manuscript accordingly.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Jan 18 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Hubert Vaudry

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Financial Disclosure section:

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

We note that one or more of the authors are employed by a commercial company: Janssen Research & Development, LLC

1. Please provide an amended Funding Statement declaring this commercial affiliation, as well as a statement regarding the Role of Funders in your study. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study. You can update author roles in the Author Contributions section of the online submission form.

Please also include the following statement within your amended Funding Statement.

“The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.”

If your commercial affiliation did play a role in your study, please state and explain this role within your updated Funding Statement.

2. Please also provide an updated Competing Interests Statement declaring this commercial affiliation along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, or marketed products, etc.

Within your Competing Interests Statement, please confirm that this commercial affiliation does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” (as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests) . If this adherence statement is not accurate and  there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these. Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

Please include both an updated Funding Statement and Competing Interests Statement in your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: General Comments:

This manuscript presents interesting work on the functional importance of signal peptide on the GPCR sequences. As it is well known that only 10% of the modern GPCRs have a signal peptide on their gene sequences, therefore, their importance and function has always been questioned. In this work, the role of the signal peptide region in PAR2 is explored. It is presented with evidences that the prime role of PAR2 signal sequence is to inhibit intracellular protease from unintended and premature activation. Overall the article is very well written and raises interesting points about the role of signal peptide in this particular and other GPCRs

Concerns:

1) Author’s suggests that the change in the EC50 of Trypsin and artificial ligand PAR2-AP observed on PAR2ΔSP when compared to PAR2 (WT) receptor is evidence for less number of PAR2ΔSP receptor on cell surface (Line 309). Since, EC50 is a measure of agonist concentration to produce half of the maximal response, hence its relationship with number of receptors, usually measured by the maximal response, must be explained in detail.

2) line-308: the mention of Super-Pharmacology Phenomenon cited the paper: “Differences between natural and recombinant G protein-coupled receptor systems with varying receptor/G protein stoichiometry”, that does not talk about “Super-Pharmacology Phenomenon”.

3) As the paper showed that the signal sequence of PAR2 is capable of functioning as a classical signal peptide (Fig 2), the authors however subsequently mentioned that the signal peptide property is not important while its main effects are to prevent premature activation in ER and golgi (Fig 5, 7). Can the signal peptide do both at the same time? As the signal peptide is release after entering the ER, how can it protect the receptor? what is the mechanism and explanation for the observed result?

4. The text quality of Fig 4(F), Fig 8, Fig10(B) must be improved.

Reviewer #2: The present manuscript entitled "The PAR2 signal peptide prevents premature receptor cleavage and activation”, described the role of signal peptide presents in PAR2 in expression and activation of this receptor. Experiments based on detection of wild-type and mutant receptors at the surface level cells associated with functional analysis of PAR2 and its mutants are rigorously performed. However, one major point and some minor points should be clarified:

- As demonstrated by authors, the deletion of the signal peptide induces the sequestration of PAR2 into the cell. This sequestration was modulated by the presence or not of tethered ligand region. Authors concluding that signal peptide prevents the protease action into the cell. However, as mentioned by authors the signal peptide sequence was coded by one exon suggesting that the expression of signal peptide deleted receptors might be possible. The question is: what is the functional role of this signal peptide deleted intracellular receptor? Could be it activated in sequestered intracellular localization? This aspect should be investigated and/or discussed.

Minor points:

Line 219 “immune-staining” could be changed by “immunofluorescence-staining”

Lines 219-225, this paragraph was very unclear. More referencing to figure N°2 should be added to clarify the purpose.

No statistical significance (or not) appears in the figure 2C, 2D, 4A, 9 and 10

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Couvineau Alain

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

8 Jan 2020

Responses to Reviewers

Authors responses to reviewer#1

Reviewer #1: General Comments:

This manuscript presents interesting work on the functional importance of signal peptide on the GPCR sequences. As it is well known that only 10% of the modern GPCRs have a signal peptide on their gene sequences, therefore, their importance and function has always been questioned. In this work, the role of the signal peptide region in PAR2 is explored. It is presented with evidences that the prime role of PAR2 signal sequence is to inhibit intracellular protease from unintended and premature activation. Overall the article is very well written and raises interesting points about the role of signal peptide in this particular and other GPCRs

Authors’ responses:

The authors thank the reviewer’s compliments and we believe the results will help us for the better understanding of the functions of signal peptides for GPCRs, particularly for PARs, and for signal peptides in general.

Concerns:

1) Author’s suggests that the change in the EC50 of Trypsin and artificial ligand PAR2-AP observed on PAR2ΔSP when compared to PAR2 (WT) receptor is evidence for less number of PAR2ΔSP receptor on cell surface (Line 309). Since, EC50 is a measure of agonist concentration to produce half of the maximal response, hence its relationship with number of receptors, usually measured by the maximal response, must be explained in detail.

Authors’ responses:

The Authors thank the reviewer for the critical points. In our revised manuscript, we added more discussions to help explain this phenomenon. It is true that when receptor expression level is very low, an increase of receptor expression often leads to an increased maximum response (Emax value). However, when receptor expression level exceeds certain level, which is often true for the recombinantly expressed receptors, the Emax value will not increase further due to reaching the capacity of cell signal transduction. In contrast, increased receptor expression will lead to increased apparent potency. In our revised manuscript, we added these discussions (Page 14, lines 322-328). To help explain this phenomenon, we changed reference#15: “Analysis of the role of receptor number in defining the intrinsic activity and potency of partial agonists in neuroblastoma x glioma hybrid NG108-15 cells transfected to express differing levels of the human beta 2-adrenoceptor. Mol. Pharmacol. 1995; 48:316-325” which provided very detailed studies for the receptor expression level and the apparent potencies.

2) line-308: the mention of Super-Pharmacology Phenomenon cited the paper: “Differences between natural and recombinant G protein-coupled receptor systems with varying receptor/G protein stoichiometry”, that does not talk about “Super-Pharmacology Phenomenon”.

Authors’ responses:

We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. We now changed the sentence to “This is likely due to the over-expression of the recombinant receptor causing a phenomenon and displaying increased potency of the ligand to the receptor (ref. 15)”. Please see page 14, lines 322-328. Page 23, lines 594-598.

3) As the paper showed that the signal sequence of PAR2 is capable of functioning as a classical signal peptide (Fig 2), the authors however subsequently mentioned that the signal peptide property is not important while its main effects are to prevent premature activation in ER and golgi (Fig 5, 7). Can the signal peptide do both at the same time? As the signal peptide is release after entering the ER, how can it protect the receptor? what is the mechanism and explanation for the observed result?

Authors’ responses:

We apologize for the confusions. For PAR2 with the protease cleavage/activation site, the signal peptide is very critical for PAR2 cell surface expression. However, when the cleavage site is blocked (by mutation, or protease inhibitors), or removed, then the signal peptide is not critical for PAR2 cell surface expression. It is not clear whether the signal peptide can do both jobs at the same time, or do the two jobs sequentially. Although the signal peptide is cleaved and released after entering ER, it is still possible that the signal peptide reignition particle (or some of signal peptide reignition particle proteins) may still bind to PAR2 protein and physically block the protease cleavage site. Alternatively, the recognition of the signal peptide may sequester PAR2 protein into a zone where proteases do not function, or where is free of proteases. We added these discussions in our revised manuscript (page 21, lines 516-521). The similar mechanism may also apply to secreted proteases, which are often secreted first as pro-enzymes that lack protease activities. After secretion, they are activated by extracellular factors (other protease, pH, etc.) and the activated protease can do self-activation of the pro-enzymes. Taking trypsin as an example, trypsin is made as trypsinogen by pancreas. Upon secretion, trypsinogen is then activated by enterokinase and the active trypsin can activate trypsinogen and the activation cascade starts on. Inside the pancreas cells, trypsinogen has to be kept inactivated. Otherwise, a very small amount activation of trypsinogen, even by accident, will lead to tremendous amount of trypsin activation, which will eventually lyse the trypsin producing cells. This never happened and suggest that trypsinogen is protected from protease cleavage/activation inside the cells.

4. The text quality of Fig 4(F), Fig 8, Fig10(B) must be improved.

Authors’ responses:

The resolution of the figures decreased dramatically after the automatic conversion to PDF. We now enlarged the figures and hope they look better. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Authors responses to reviewer#2

Reviewer #2: The present manuscript entitled "The PAR2 signal peptide prevents premature receptor cleavage and activation”, described the role of signal peptide presents in PAR2 in expression and activation of this receptor. Experiments based on detection of wild-type and mutant receptors at the surface level cells associated with functional analysis of PAR2 and its mutants are rigorously performed. However, one major point and some minor points should be clarified:

- As demonstrated by authors, the deletion of the signal peptide induces the sequestration of PAR2 into the cell. This sequestration was modulated by the presence or not of tethered ligand region. Authors concluding that signal peptide prevents the protease action into the cell. However, as mentioned by authors the signal peptide sequence was coded by one exon suggesting that the expression of signal peptide deleted receptors might be possible. The question is: what is the functional role of this signal peptide deleted intracellular receptor? Could be it activated in sequestered intracellular localization? This aspect should be investigated and/or discussed.

Authors responses

Thanks to the reviewer for raising this very brain stimulating question. In our manuscript, we only created an artificial protein PAR2∆SP. It is possible that this receptor will be activated by intracellular protease located in ER and Golgi and causing cell signaling before reaching the cells surface, which may increase the basal activation of the cells without the extracellular proteases, achieving a raised tone for certain physiological status of the cells. Since the signal peptide coding region of PAR2 is on a separate exon in the PAR2 gene, alternative splicing, or transcription start (using a potential promotor in the intron region) could lead to a mRNA that encodes a PAR2 protein without the signal peptide. A blast search of NCBI Genbank showed that there is a single submission (XM_017009223.1) encoding a PAR2 without the signal peptide, suggesting that it remains a possibility that a natural PAR2 without the signal peptide may exist. In our revised manuscript, we add these discussions. Page 21, lines 537-543.

Minor points:

Line 219 “immune-staining” could be changed by “immunofluorescence-staining”

Authors responses

As suggested by reviewer, we changed “immune-staining” to “immunofluorescence-staining.

Page 11, line 223.

Lines 219-225, this paragraph was very unclear. More referencing to figure N°2 should be added to clarify the purpose.

Authors responses

In our revised manuscript, we added more referring of Fig 2A to help clarify the purposes. Page 11, lines 226-229; 236-237.

No statistical significance (or not) appears in the figure 2C, 2D, 4A, 9 and 10

Authors responses

We added statistical analysis to Figures 2C, 2D, 4A, 9 and 10 and added details for the statistical analysis in the legends respectively. Please see details for

Figure 2 legend: Page 11, line 245 to page 12, line 254.

Figure 4 legend: Page 13, lines 299 -302.

Figure 9 legend: Page 18, lines 450-455.

Figure 10 legend: Page 20, lines 492-497.

Submitted filename: Responses to reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

4 Feb 2020

The PAR2 signal peptide prevents premature receptor cleavage and activation

PONE-D-19-23622R1

Dear Dr. Liu,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Hubert Vaudry

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The authors have addressed my previous concerns and I have no further comment. I think this is good article.

Reviewer #2: The present revised manuscript entitled "The PAR2 signal peptide prevents premature receptor cleavage and activation”, described the role of signal peptide presents in PAR2 in expression and activation of this receptor. Experiments based on detection of wild-type and mutant receptors at the surface level cells associated with functional analysis of PAR2 and its mutants are rigorously performed.

In this revised manuscript the authors have clearly replied to my comments.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: COUVINEAU Alain

12 Feb 2020

PONE-D-19-23622R1

The PAR2 signal peptide prevents premature receptor cleavage and activation

Dear Dr. Liu:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Hubert Vaudry

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Table 1

The Genbank accession numbers for cDNA sequences used for PCR primer design and primer sequences for qPCRs.

Gene	Accession No	Forward Primer Sequence	Reverse Primer Sequence
Human PAR1	NM_001992.4	CCATTTTGGGAGGATGAGGAG	AGGATGAACACAACGATGGCCAT
Human PAR2	NM_005242.5	ATGGCACATCCCACGTCACTGGA	GAACCAGATGACAGAGAGGAGGTC
Human PAR3	NM_004101.3	ATGCTACCATGGGGTACCTGAC	GTTGCCATAGAAGATGACTGTGGT
Human PAR4	NM_003950.3	CCTCCACCATGCTGCTGATGAA	AGGTCTGCCGCTGCAGTGTCA
Human Actin	NM_001101.4	GGTCATCACCATTGGCAATGAG	GATCTTGATCTTCATTGTGCTG
Monkey PAR1	XM_011730122	CCATTTTGGGAGGATGAGGAG	AGGATGAACACAACGATGGCCAT
Monkey PAR2	XM_011730121	ATGGCACATCCCACGTCACTGGA	GAACCAGATGACAGAGAGGAGGTC
Monkey PAR3	XM_003899832	ATGCTACCATGGGGTACCTGAC	GTTGCCATAGAAGATGACTGTGGT
Monkey PAR4	XM_011759280	CCTCCACCATGCTGCTGATGAA	AGGTCTGCCGCTGCAGTGTCA
Monkey Actin	NM_001033084	GGCACCACACCTTCTACAATG	GGTCCAGACGCAGGATGGCAT
Hamster PAR1	XM_007636187	CGCCAGCCAGAATCTGAGATG	CGAGGGGATGAAGAGCCTCAG
Hamster PAR2	XM_007632089	GGACGCAACGGTAAAGGAAGA	CTTCGTCCGGAAAAGGAAGAC
Hamster PAR3	XM_003498712	CTTCTGCCAGCCACTTTTTGC	GGAACTTCTCAGGTATCCCATGGT
Hamster PAR4	XM_007629105	GGGAAATTCTGTGCCAACGAC	GGCCAATAGTAGGTCCGAAAC
Hamster Actin	NM_001244575	GTAGCCATTCAGGCTGTGCTG	ATGCAGCAGTGGCCATCTCCT

All primer sequences are shown from 5’ to 3’.