| Literature DB >> 32545848 |
Chuanyin Li1,2, Tianting Han1,2, Rong Guo1,2, Peng Chen1,2, Chao Peng2,3, Gali Prag4, Ronggui Hu1,2,5.
Abstract
Global identification of substrates for PTMs (post-translational modifications) represents a critical but yet dauntingly challenging task in understanding biology and disease pathology. Here we presented a synthetic biology approach, namely 'YESS', which coupled Y2H (yeast two hybrid) interactome screening with PTMs reactions reconstituted in bacteria for substrates identification and validation, followed by the functional validation in mammalian cells. Specifically, the sequence-independent Gateway® cloning technique was adopted to afford simultaneous transfer of multiple hit ORFs (open reading frames) between the YESS sub-systems. In proof-of-evidence applications of YESS, novel substrates were identified for UBE3A and UFL1, the E3 ligases for ubiquitination and ufmylation, respectively. Therefore, the YESS approach could serve as a potentially powerful tool to study cellular signaling mediated by different PTMs.Entities:
Keywords: UBE3A; UFL1; post-translational modifications; ubiquitination; ufmylation
Year: 2020 PMID: 32545848 PMCID: PMC7352202 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21124231
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1The workflow of YESS approach. Schematic illustration of the four major steps for YESS: (A) Yeast two hybrid (Y2H) screening to identify interacting proteins of an E3 ligase (UBE3A/UFL1). (B) -based system to reconstitute ubiquitination/ufmylation followed by affinity enrichment of the modified substrates. (C) Site mapping for ubiquitination/ufmylation by mass spectrum analysis. *, ubiquitination/ufmylation sites. (D) Substrates validation individually tested in , in vitro and in vivo ubiquitination/ufmylation system, which could be followed by further functional tests in relevant systems. Y, Yeast two-hybrid (Y2H); E, E. coli screen; S, Sites analysis; S, Substrates validation.
Figure 2YESSUB, YESS applied to interrogate UBE3A-mediated Ub signaling. (A) UBE3A-interacting proteins screened by Y2H with human UBE3A as the bait. (B) Reconstituting the ubiquitination system by transforming YESSUB vector that expressing Ub(Ha-Ub), E1(UBA1), E2(UBCH7) and E3(UBE3A) into BL21 cells and the expression of these proteins was detected by immunoblotting assay. (C) A schematic illustration of the ubiquitination sites of SERPINB2 (I and II) or ALDH1A2 (III and IV) identified in (upper panel) or mammalian HEK293T cells (lower panel), as revealed by mass spectrum analysis. (D and E) Substrates validation. UBE3A-interacting SERPINB2, ALDH1A2 and MCM6 were individually subjected to ubiquitination assay in (D) or in vitro (E) and MCM6 was negative in both tests. +, transfected with indicated plasmid; −, without transfected with indicated plasmid. (F) Detection the ubiquitination of SERPINB2 in wild type or UBE3A−/− H1299 cells expressing UBE3A or the enzymatically dead C843A mutant. (G) Detection the ubiquitination of ALDH1A2 in wild type or UBE3A−/− SHY5Y cells expressing UBE3A or the enzymatically dead C843A mutant. -, UBE3A gene knoctout allele. (H and I) Functional analysis of UBE3A mediated ubiquitination of ALDH1A2, which regulates retinoic acid homeostasis as well as its downstream signaling pathway. RARE-luciferase reporter assay (H) or the relative mRNA abundances of Hoxd4 and Fgf8, the two targeted genes in retinoic acid signaling (I). Wild type or UBE3A−/− SHY5Y cells that expressing UBE3A or the enzymatically dead C843A mutant were treated with 1.0 µM all-trans retinoic acid for 8 h before harvesting. Data are presented as mean ± SD, one-way ANOVA, with Bonferroni post-hoc test, three independent experiments. * p < 0.05, significant difference; ** p < 0.01, very significant difference; NS, no significant difference. (J) UBE3A-mediated ubiquitination of SERPINB2 disrupted the inhibition of SERPINB2 on uPA activity. Cell lysates from wild type or UBE3A−/− H1299 cells expressing UBE3A or the enzymatically dead C843A mutant were subjected to uPA activity analysis. Data are presented as mean ± SD, one-way ANOVA, with Bonferroni post-hoc test, three independent experiments. * p < 0.05, significant difference; ** p < 0.01, very significant difference; NS, no significant difference.
Figure 3YESSUFM1, YESS applied to identify and characterize substrates for UFL1-mediated ufmylation. (A) UFL1-interacting proteins screened by Y2H with human UFL1 as the bait. (B) Reconstituting the E. coli ufmylation system by transforming YESSUFM1 vector that expressing UFM1 (Ha-UFM1), E1 (UBA5-V5), E2 (UFC1-Flag) and E3 (UFL1) into BL21 cells and the expression of these proteins was detected by immunoblotting assay. +, transfected with indicated plasmid; −, without transfected with indicated plasmid. (C) A schematic illustration of the ufmylation sites on DDRGK1, MT1M and TSC22D3 identified in E. coli ufmylation system as revealed by mass spectrum analysis. (D and E) Substrates validation. UFL1-interacting DDRGK1, MT1M and TSC22D3 were individually subjected to ufmylation assay in E. coli (D) or in vitro (E). (F) Detection the ufmylation of DDRGK1, MT1M and TSC22D3 in wild type or UFL1 HEK293T cells expressing empty vectors or UFL1. −, UFL1 gene knoctout allele.