| Literature DB >> 32363014 |
Charlotte S Dawson1,2, Donovan Garcia-Ceron1, Harinda Rajapaksha3, Pierre Faou3, Mark R Bleackley1, Marilyn A Anderson1.
Abstract
Background: Fungal extracellular vesicles (EVs) have been implicated in host-pathogen and pathogen-pathogen communication in some fungal diseases. In depth research into fungal EVs has been hindered by the lack of specific protein markers such as those found in mammalian EVs that have enabled sophisticated isolation and analysis techniques. Despite their role in fungal EV biogenesis, ESCRT proteins such as Vps23 (Tsg101) and Bro1 (ALIX) are not present as fungal EV cargo. Furthermore, tetraspanin homologs are yet to be identified in many fungi including the model yeast S. cerevisiae. Objective: We performed de novo identification of EV protein markers for the major human fungal pathogen Candida albicans with adherence to MISEV2018 guidelines. Materials and methods: EVs were isolated by differential ultracentrifugation from DAY286, ATCC90028 and ATCC10231 yeast cells, as well as DAY286 biofilms. Whole cell lysates (WCL) were also obtained from the EV-releasing cells. Label-free quantitative proteomics was performed to determine the set of proteins consistently enriched in EVs compared to WCL.Entities:
Keywords: Candida albicans; extracellular vesicles; fungi; markers; pathogen; proteomics
Year: 2020 PMID: 32363014 PMCID: PMC7178836 DOI: 10.1080/20013078.2020.1750810
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Extracell Vesicles ISSN: 2001-3078
Candidate positive protein markers for C. albicans EVs. This list of proteins consists of those that were found to be exclusive to EVs or significantly enriched in EVs across the four C. albicans strains examined in this study. Proteins are grouped according to their subcellular localisation as annotated in the Candida Genome Database (candidagenome.org) [48,49] unless otherwise indicated. The log2 ratio of the abundance (mean MaxQuant LFQ intensity) of each protein in EVs compared to whole cell lysate (WCL) for each strain is listed. “ex” indicates where a protein was only quantified in the EV fraction and not the WCL for that strain. The “TM” column indicates the number of transmembrane domains for each protein as annotated in UniProt. “SP” indicates whether a protein is annotated as having a signal peptide according to UniProt. “VDM” shows whether a protein has been detected previously in vesicle-depleted culture media (i.e. the proteins may also be in the soluble secretome) [31]. Underlined proteins are those identified as the best candidates for positive EV markers according to the criteria depicted in Supplementary Figure S1.
| log2(fold change) EV vs WCL | ||||||||
| Name | Function | DAY Y | A9 | A1 | DAY B | TM | SP | VDM |
| CDR1;CDR2 | Multidrug transporter of ABC superfamily | ex | ex | ex | 11.19 | 12;12 | ||
| CHS3 | Major chitin synthase of yeast and hyphae | ex | 4.12 | ex | ex | 5 | ||
| ENA21 | Predicted P-type ATPase sodium pumpa | ex | ex | ex | ex | 9 | ||
| GAP4 | High-affinity S-adenosylmethionine permease | ex | ex | ex | 4.28 | 12 | ||
| GSC1 | 1,3-beta-glucan synthase | 2.57 | 3.45 | 5.97 | 8.01 | 15 | ||
| HGT1 | High-affinity MFS glucose transporter | ex | ex | ex | ex | 12 | ||
| HGT6 | Putative high-affinity MFS glucose transporter | 4.04 | 4.78 | 6.53 | 5.68 | 11 | ||
| HGT7 | Putative MFS glucose transporter | ex | 5.95 | ex | ex | 11 | ||
| PHM7 | Putative ion transporter | ex | ex | ex | ex | 11 | ||
| PMA1 | Plasma membrane ATPase | 5.65 | 4.38 | 5.60 | 6.46 | 8 | ||
| BGL2 | 1,3-beta-glucanosyltransferase | 7.26 | 9.44 | 11.08 | ex | Y | Y | |
| CRH11 | GPI-anchored cell wall transglycosylase | ex | ex | ex | ex | Y | Y | |
| ECM33 | GPI-anchored cell wall protein | 4.39 | 5.28 | 8.31 | 7.03 | Y | Y | |
| MP65 | Cell surface mannoprotein | ex | ex | ex | ex | Y | Y | |
| MSB2 | Mucin family adhesin-like protein | ex | ex | ex | ex | 1 | Y | Y |
| PGA4 | 1,3-beta-glucanosyltransferase | ex | ex | ex | ex | Y | Y | |
| PGA52 | GPI-anchored cell surface protein of unknown function | ex | ex | ex | ex | Y | Y | |
| PHR2 | Glycosidase | ex | 3.51 | 6.44 | ex | Y | Y | |
| PLB4.5 | Phospholipase B | ex | ex | ex | ex | Y | Y | |
| SAP9 | Secreted aspartyl protease | ex | ex | ex | ex | 1 | Y | Y |
| YWP1 | Secreted yeast cell wall protein | 2.37 | 3.51 | 6.17 | ex | Y | Y | |
| ERO1 | ER oxidoreductin | ex | ex | 2.32 | 1.68 | Y | Y | |
| SEC61 | ER protein-translocation complex subunit | 2.53 | 2.16 | 2.10 | 1.46 | 8 | ||
| MIR1 | Putative mitochondrial phosphate transportera | 3.68 | 4.38 | 4.24 | 1.60 | |||
| POR1 | Mitochondrial outer membrane porina | 3.44 | 2.51 | 3.69 | 1.38 | |||
aProtein localisation was inferred from sequence similarity with S. cerevisiae homolog as annotated in the Candida Genome Database [48,49].
bProtein localisation was obtained from the GO Cellular Component annotation in the C. albicans UniProt reference proteome UP000000559 [58].
cPresence of transmembrane domains and absence of a signal peptide was predicted using TOPCONS2 [59].
dThe name Evp1 for the protein encoded by orf19.6741 was proposed in the present study.
Figure 5.Identification of commonly enriched EV proteins across different . Heatmap of proteins identified in all four EV samples (n = 396, Venn overlap in Figure 4A). Each column represents a C. albicans strain and each row represents a protein. The colours indicate the log2(FC) of the protein for that particular strain; red is EV enriched, blue is EV depleted, and black is EV exclusive. Unsupervised clustering of rows and columns was performed using Gower’s formula via the daisy function from the R package cluster [57]. Proteins which were exclusive to EVs in all four data sets and therefore had no valid log2(FC) values were separated prior to clustering, in the group designated “Cluster 8”. Functional enrichment analyses were performed on the heatmap protein clusters using the online tool FungiFun2 [56]. a selection of significantly enriched GO terms, biological process (BP), cellular component (CC), and molecular function (MF), are presented in the table inset. Full lists of enriched GO terms and proteins in each cluster are available in Supplementary Data S3 and S5 respectively. Proteins in bold italics are the 22 putative C. albicans EV marker proteins presented in Figure 7.
Figure 1.Characterisation and quantification of EVs from different . (a) Representative TEM images of EVs isolated from different C. albicans strains. Scale bar indicates 0.5 µm. (B) Size distribution of DAY286 yeast (n = 3), ATCC90028 yeast (n = 3), ATCC10231 yeast (n = 3), and DAY286 biofilm (n = 5) EVs as measured by nanoparticle tracking analysis. Bar plots show the percentage of the total number of EVs that can be assigned to each size range. The size of the bars indicates the mean percentage across each biological replicate and the error bars indicate the standard error of the mean. NTA traces for the individual biological replicates are presented in Supplementary Figure S2. (C) Comparison of the ratio of particle concentration to protein concentration of the EV fraction, (particles/mL) ÷ (µg protein/mL), across the four EV sources. Each dot represents one biological replicate. Sample means were compared using One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s HSD post-hoc test. Adjusted p-values indicating significant differences are shown. The particle and protein concentrations for each biological replicate are provided in Supplementary Table S1.
Figure 2.Differential abundance analysis of proteins identified in . (a) Venn diagrams comparing the EV and WCL proteomes from four C. albicans strains; DAY286 yeast (n = 3), ATCC90028 yeast (n = 3), ATCC10231 yeast (n = 3), and DAY286 biofilm (n = 5). Whole cell lysates were prepared from the EV source cells. Proteins were quantified (MaxQuant LFQ intensity) in a minimum of 2/3 (yeast) and 4/5 (biofilm) biological replicates of EV or WCL. (B) Volcano plots depicting significantly enriched EV or WCL proteins. Differential abundance analysis was performed by comparing the mean normalised LFQ intensities of proteins identified in both EV and WCL (i.e. proteins in the Venn overlap) using the package limma [47,52]. Significantly enriched proteins were identified using a Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p-value cut-off of 0.01 and log2(FC) cut-off of 1. Counts of significant and non-significant proteins are indicated on each graph. Proteins with a log2(FC) greater than 8 are labelled. Data tables underlying the Venn diagrams and volcano plots are provided in Supplementary Data S2.
Figure 3.Functional enrichment analyses of the significantly enriched and exclusive . The online tool FungiFun2 (elbe.hki-jena.de/fungifun) was used to identify enriched biological process (BP), cellular component (CC), and molecular function (MF) GO terms [56] based on EV enriched or exclusive proteins from (a) DAY286 yeast, (B) ATCC90028, (C) ATCC10231, and (D) DAY286 biofilm. The top 8 (where present) significantly enriched terms for each GO domain are shown (Hypergeometric distribution, Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p-value < 0.01). They are presented top to bottom in order of increasing Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted p-value. Full lists of enriched GO terms can be found in Supplementary Data S3.
Figure 4.Combined comparison of . (a) Venn diagram comparing four C. albicans EV proteomes. Lists of EV proteins present in the Venn diagrams in Figure 2A were compared to identify proteins common to all four EV datasets. (B) Venn diagram comparing four C. albicans WCL proteomes. Lists of WCL proteins present in the Venn diagrams in Figure 2A were compared to identify proteins common to all four WCL datasets. The data tables underlying Figuress 4A and 4B are provided in Supplementary Data S4. (C) Multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot of each LC-MS/MS biological replicate sample with the first 2 dimensions shown. Pairwise distance between samples approximately indicates the log2(FC) between samples. The plotMDS function from limma was used to generate the MDS plots [52]. (D) MDS plot of each LC-MS/MS biological replicate sample with the second and third dimensions shown.
Figure 7.Twenty-two best potential . The most promising EV marker proteins are underlined in Table 1. They are enriched or exclusive to EVs isolated from all the C. albicans strains investigated in this study. The proteins fit within the EV biomarker categories 1 and 2 from MISEV2018 which includes transmembrane, GPI-anchored, and cytosolic proteins that are EV enriched [15].
Figure 6.Identification of common significantly enriched or exclusive . Proteins identified as significantly enriched or exclusive to EVs in Figure 2 were compared to select those which were common to all four datasets. (A) 47 proteins were identified as potential positive EV protein markers and (B) 62 proteins as potential negative EV protein markers. The data tables underlying Figure 6 are provided in Supplementary Data S4. Details of the 47 positive EV protein marker candidates and 62 negative candidates can be found in Table 1 and Supplementary Table S2, respectively.
Figure 8.Predicted topology and palmitoylation sites of . TOPCONS2 (topcons.cbr.su.se) [59] was used to analyse the amino acid sequences of human CD81 and C. albicans Sur7 and Evp1 to predict their topology and the location of transmembrane (TM) domains. The hydrophobicity plots (light blue chart) and topology diagrams (red and blue lines) are shown on the left side of the figure. Additionally, cysteine residues of Sur7 and Evp1 predicted to be palmitoylated using CSS-PALM 4.0 (csspalm.biocuckoo.org) have been annotated [60]. For CD81, palmitoylation sites experimentally determined in previous literature are shown [119]. The right side of the figure shows a cartoon representation of the TOPCONS2 consensus topology prediction for the three proteins as well as the crystal structure of CD81 (PDB: 5TCX) [120].