FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2031668046> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2031668046 endingPage "21669" @default.
• W2031668046 startingPage "21664" @default.
• W2031668046 abstract "SUMO-1 is an ubiquitin-related protein that is covalently conjugated to a diverse assortment of proteins. The consequences of SUMO-1 modification include the regulation of protein-protein interactions, protein-DNA interactions, and protein subcellular localization. At present, very little is understood about the specific mechanisms that govern the recognition of proteins as substrates for SUMO-1 modification. However, many of the proteins that are modified by SUMO-1 interact directly with the SUMO-1 conjugating enzyme, Ubc9. These interactions suggest that Ubc9 binding may play an important role in substrate recognition as well as in substrate modification. The SUMO-1 consensus sequence (SUMO-1-CS) is a motif of conserved residues surrounding the modified lysine residue of most SUMO-1 substrates. This motif conforms to the sequence “ΨKXE,” where Ψ is a large hydrophobic residue, K is the lysine to which SUMO-1 is conjugated, X is any amino acid, and E is glutamic acid. In this study, we demonstrate that the SUMO-1-CS is a major determinant of Ubc9 binding and SUMO-1 modification. Mutating residues in the SUMO-1-CS abolishes both Ubc9 binding and substrate modification. These findings have important implications for how SUMO-1 substrates are recognized and for how SUMO-1 is ultimately transferred to specific lysine residues on these substrates. SUMO-1 is an ubiquitin-related protein that is covalently conjugated to a diverse assortment of proteins. The consequences of SUMO-1 modification include the regulation of protein-protein interactions, protein-DNA interactions, and protein subcellular localization. At present, very little is understood about the specific mechanisms that govern the recognition of proteins as substrates for SUMO-1 modification. However, many of the proteins that are modified by SUMO-1 interact directly with the SUMO-1 conjugating enzyme, Ubc9. These interactions suggest that Ubc9 binding may play an important role in substrate recognition as well as in substrate modification. The SUMO-1 consensus sequence (SUMO-1-CS) is a motif of conserved residues surrounding the modified lysine residue of most SUMO-1 substrates. This motif conforms to the sequence “ΨKXE,” where Ψ is a large hydrophobic residue, K is the lysine to which SUMO-1 is conjugated, X is any amino acid, and E is glutamic acid. In this study, we demonstrate that the SUMO-1-CS is a major determinant of Ubc9 binding and SUMO-1 modification. Mutating residues in the SUMO-1-CS abolishes both Ubc9 binding and substrate modification. These findings have important implications for how SUMO-1 substrates are recognized and for how SUMO-1 is ultimately transferred to specific lysine residues on these substrates. small ubiquitin-like modifier-1 SUMO-1 consensus sequence SUMO-1 conjugating enzyme Ran GTPase activating protein 1 glutathione S-transferase polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis promyelocytic leukemia protein ubiquitin activating enzyme ubiquitin carrier protein ubiquitin-protein isopeptide ligase. SUMO-11 is a member of a family of ubiquitin-like proteins that are post-translationally conjugated to other proteins (1Melchior F. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2000; 16: 591-626Crossref PubMed Scopus (656) Google Scholar). The specific effects of SUMO-1 modification appear to be substrate dependent, but they are clearly distinct from the effects of ubiquitination in mediating protein degradation. In a number of cases, SUMO-1 modification regulates the subcellular localization of specific substrates. For example, SUMO-1 modification targets RanGAP1 from the cytoplasm to the nuclear pore complex (2Mahajan R. Gerace L. Melchior F. J. Cell Biol. 1998; 140: 259-270Crossref PubMed Scopus (239) Google Scholar, 3Matunis M.J. Wu J. Blobel G. J. Cell Biol. 1998; 140: 499-509Crossref PubMed Scopus (381) Google Scholar) and PML from the nucleoplasm to PML nuclear bodies (4Muller S. Matunis M.J. Dejean A. EMBO J. 1998; 17: 61-70Crossref PubMed Scopus (581) Google Scholar). SUMO-1 modification of certain other substrates may play a role in antagonizing ubiquitin-mediated proteolysis. IκBα and MDM2, for example, are both modified by SUMO-1 on lysine residues that also function as sites for ubiquitination (5Desterro J.M. Rodriguez M.S. Hay R.T. Mol. Cell. 1998; 2: 233-239Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (919) Google Scholar, 6Buschmann T. Fuchs S.Y. Lee C.G. Pan Z.Q. Ronai Z. Cell. 2000; 101: 753-762Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (227) Google Scholar). SUMO-1 modification of these lysines has been proposed to stabilize the substrates by blocking ubiquitin modification. For a growing list of other substrates, the exact effects of SUMO-1 modification remain to be determined. A majority of these substrates, including p53 (7Muller S. Berger M. Lehembre F. Seeler J.S. Haupt Y. Dejean A. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 13321-13329Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (350) Google Scholar, 8Gostissa M. Hengstermann A. Fogal V. Sandy P. Schwarz S.E. Scheffner M. Del Sal G. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 6462-6471Crossref PubMed Scopus (438) Google Scholar, 9Rodriguez M.S. Desterro J.M. Lain S. Midgley C.A. Lane D.P. Hay R.T. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 6455-6461Crossref PubMed Scopus (561) Google Scholar), c-Jun (7Muller S. Berger M. Lehembre F. Seeler J.S. Haupt Y. Dejean A. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 13321-13329Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (350) Google Scholar), and topoisomerases I and II (10Mao Y. Desai S.D. Liu L.F. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 26066-26073Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (123) Google Scholar, 11Mao Y. Sun M. Desai S.D. Liu L.F. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2000; 97: 4046-4051Crossref PubMed Scopus (181) Google Scholar) are nuclear proteins that function in regulating transcription or chromatin structure. Immunofluorescence analysis and cell fractionation studies further indicate that the majority of proteins modified by SUMO-1 are nuclear and that they correspond to only a small subfraction of all cellular proteins (12Matunis M.J. Coutavas E. Blobel G. J. Cell Biol. 1996; 135: 1457-1470Crossref PubMed Scopus (961) Google Scholar). The specific subfraction of proteins modified by SUMO-1 also varies throughout the cell cycle (13Li S.J. Hochstrasser M. Nature. 1999; 398: 246-251Crossref PubMed Scopus (608) Google Scholar), and possibly in response to cellular growth conditions, indicating that SUMO-1 modification and de-modification are dynamic processes. However, the precise mechanisms involved in substrate selection and in regulating the timing of modification or demodification are poorly defined. Many steps involved in SUMO-1 modification parallel those involved in ubiquitination. Like ubiquitin, SUMO-1 is synthesized as a precursor that is proteolytically processed to generate the mature, active polypeptide (13Li S.J. Hochstrasser M. Nature. 1999; 398: 246-251Crossref PubMed Scopus (608) Google Scholar, 14Johnson E.S. Schwienhorst I. Dohmen R.J. Blobel G. EMBO J. 1997; 16: 5509-5519Crossref PubMed Scopus (445) Google Scholar). Once processed, SUMO-1 is activated in an ATP-dependent reaction that creates a thioester intermediate between the active-site cysteine of the SUMO-1 activating enzyme (E1) and the carboxyl terminus of SUMO-1. The SUMO-1 E1 enzyme, a heterodimer consisting of Aos1 and Uba2, is structurally and functionally related to the ubiquitin E1 enzyme (14Johnson E.S. Schwienhorst I. Dohmen R.J. Blobel G. EMBO J. 1997; 16: 5509-5519Crossref PubMed Scopus (445) Google Scholar, 15Gong L. Li B. Millas S. Yeh E.T. FEBS Lett. 1999; 448: 185-189Crossref PubMed Scopus (132) Google Scholar, 16Okuma T. Honda R. Ichikawa G. Tsumagari N. Yasuda H. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1999; 254: 693-698Crossref PubMed Scopus (184) Google Scholar). Following activation, SUMO-1 is transferred from the E1 enzyme to Ubc9, a protein similar in structure and function to ubiquitin E2 enzymes (17Gong L. Kamitani T. Fujise K. Caskey L.S. Yeh E.T. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 28198-28201Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (169) Google Scholar, 18Saitoh H. Sparrow D.B. Shiomi T. Pu R.T. Nishimoto T. Mohun T.J. Dasso M. Curr. Biol. 1998; 8: 121-124Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (162) Google Scholar, 19Lee G.W. Melchior F. Matunis M.J. Mahajan R. Tian Q. Anderson P. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 6503-6507Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (121) Google Scholar, 20Desterro J.M. Thomson J. Hay R.T. FEBS Lett. 1997; 417: 297-300Crossref PubMed Scopus (304) Google Scholar, 21Johnson E.S. Blobel G. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 26799-26802Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (411) Google Scholar). How SUMO-1 is subsequently transferred from Ubc9 to specific protein substrates is the most poorly defined step in the SUMO-1 conjugation pathway. Although SUMO-1 modification must be quite specific by virtue of the limited number of cellular proteins that are modified, there is very little, if any, homology among the currently known substrates. Probably all ubiquitination reactions involve E3 ligases, factors that mediate the transfer of ubiquitin from E2 enzymes to specific protein substrates (22Yamao F. J. Biochem. ( Tokyo ). 1999; 125: 223-229Crossref PubMed Scopus (41) Google Scholar, 23Hershko A. Ciechanover A. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1998; 67: 425-479Crossref PubMed Scopus (6959) Google Scholar). In general, E3s function in substrate recognition and are responsible for the high degree of specificity that is characteristic of most ubiquitination reactions. Currently no E3-like factors have been identified for SUMO-1 conjugation, so how specific proteins are recognized as substrates for SUMO-1 conjugation remains unknown. Relative to ubiquitin-specific E2 enzymes, an unusual feature of Ubc9 is that it interacts directly with many SUMO-1 substrates (1Melchior F. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2000; 16: 591-626Crossref PubMed Scopus (656) Google Scholar). These interactions suggest that Ubc9 may play a direct role in recognizing SUMO-1 substrates, as well as in modifying them. In this study, we demonstrate that Ubc9 binds to the SUMO-1 consensus sequence (SUMO-1-CS), a motif of conserved residues surrounding the modified lysine of many SUMO-1 substrates. We further demonstrate that the binding of Ubc9 to the SUMO-1-CS is essential for SUMO-1 modification. Expression vectors coding for wild-type mouse RanGAP1, CΔ23, NΔ419/PK, and NΔ502/PK were constructed as previously described (3Matunis M.J. Wu J. Blobel G. J. Cell Biol. 1998; 140: 499-509Crossref PubMed Scopus (381) Google Scholar). Site-directed mutagenesis was performed using the GeneEditor Mutatgenesis System (Promega Corp., Madison, WI) and mutations were verified by DNA sequencing. A cDNA coding for human Ubc9 was obtained from a fetal liver cDNA library using the polymerase chain reaction and cloned into the GST expression vector, pGEX-5X-1 (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ). The carboxyl-terminal domain of mouse RanGAP1 (NΔ419: amino acids 420–589) was similarly amplified from a cDNA clone by polymerase chain reaction and subcloned into pGEX-5X-1. In vitro transcription and translation of RanGAP1 and RanGAP1-pyruvate kinase fusion proteins were performed in rabbit reticulocyte lysate in the presence of [35S]methionine as described by the manufacturer (Promega Corp., Madison, WI). GST-NΔ419 and GST-Ubc9 fusion proteins were expressed in bacteria, purified by affinity chromatography on glutathione-Sepharose beads, and cleaved from the beads by Factor Xa as outlined by the manufacturer (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Gel filtration analysis of the carboxyl-terminal domain of RanGAP1 and Ubc9 was performed on a Amersham Pharmacia Biotech Superdex 75 chromatography column. The column was equilibrated and proteins were fractionated with buffer containing 110 mm potassium acetate, 2 mm magnesium acetate, 20 mm HEPES (pH 7.3), and 1 mm dithiothreitol. 20μ of each protein was loaded either individually or together following mixing and incubation for 30 min at room temperature. 0.5-ml fractions were collected, trichloroacetic acid precipitated, and analyzed by SDS-PAGE. GST-Ubc9, or GST alone, was bound to 20 μ l of glutathione-Sepharose beads (1 mg of protein/ml beads) in phosphate-buffered saline containing 1 mmdithiothreitol. Nonspecific protein-binding sites were blocked by incubation with 2% bovine serum albumin for 60 min at 4 °C. An equivalent amount (radioactive counts) of each in vitrotranslated protein was incubated with the beads in 100 μ l of binding buffer (20 mm Tris (pH 7.5), 150 mm NaCl, 0.1% Tween 20) for 30 min at room temperature. Beads were washed three times with binding buffer followed by elution of the bound proteins with SDS-PAGE sample buffer. Binding was analyzed by SDS-PAGE, or by quantifying counts in a liquid scintillation counter. The Ubc9 binding observed for each mutant protein relative to that of wild-type was determined from the ratio of GST-Ubc9 bound radioactive counts (following subtraction of counts bound to GST alone). Competition studies using SUMO-1 as a competitor were performed as described above except that translated proteins were incubated with immobilized Ubc9 in the presence of the indicated amounts of recombinant SUMO-1. Quantification of the relative amounts of modified and unmodified proteins bound to Ubc9 was determined by PhosphorImager analysis after separation of the proteins by SDS-PAGE. The carboxyl-terminal domain of RanGAP1 is modified by SUMO-1 at lysine residue 526 (3Matunis M.J. Wu J. Blobel G. J. Cell Biol. 1998; 140: 499-509Crossref PubMed Scopus (381) Google Scholar, 24Mahajan R. Delphin C. Guan T. Gerace L. Melchior F. Cell. 1997; 88: 97-107Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1010) Google Scholar). We have previously shown that modification at this site is dependent on a ∼120-amino acid domain of RanGAP1 extending from residue 470 to the carboxyl terminus (3Matunis M.J. Wu J. Blobel G. J. Cell Biol. 1998; 140: 499-509Crossref PubMed Scopus (381) Google Scholar) (summarized in Fig.1). The ability of this domain to specify SUMO-1 modification was demonstrated by in vitro translation in rabbit reticulocyte lysate, where SUMO-1 modification is mediated by endogenous Aos1/Uba2 and Ubc9 activities (3Matunis M.J. Wu J. Blobel G. J. Cell Biol. 1998; 140: 499-509Crossref PubMed Scopus (381) Google Scholar) (Fig.2, lanes 1 and7).Figure 2A 120-amino acid domain near the carboxyl terminus of RanGAP1 mediates Ubc9 binding. Wild-type RanGAP1 (lanes 1–3), the carboxyl-terminal deletion mutant CΔ23 (lanes 4–6), and the pyruvate kinase fusion proteins NΔ419/PK (lanes 7–9), and ND502/PK (lanes 10–12) were transcribed and translated in rabbit reticulocyte lysates in the presence of [35S]methionine and incubated with immobilized GST-Ubc9 or GST. Bound proteins were eluted with SDS sample buffer and analyzed by SDS-PAGE followed by autoradiography. The amount of protein loaded in “input” is equivalent to 40% the amount of protein assayed in each binding reaction. Molecular mass standards are indicated on the left and asterisksindicate SUMO-1-modified proteins. Unmodified RanGAP1 and pyruvate kinase fusion protein translation products all appear as triplets following separation by SDS-PAGE, possibly due to initiation of translation at internal start sites or to phosphorylation.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload Hi-res image Download (PPT) A significant fraction of the proteins modified by SUMO-1 are known to interact directly with the SUMO-1 conjugating enzyme, Ubc9 (1Melchior F. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2000; 16: 591-626Crossref PubMed Scopus (656) Google Scholar). Although RanGAP1 is one of the best characterized SUMO-1 substrates, its interactions with Ubc9 have not been analyzed previously. To investigate the functional relevance of Ubc9-substrate interactions, we assayed for the ability of Ubc9 to bind to RanGAP1 and also to the various mutant and heterologous proteins summarized in Fig. 1. GST-Ubc9 (or GST alone as a control) was immobilized on glutathione-Sepharose beads and incubated with 35S-labeled proteins produced by translation in rabbit reticulocyte lysate. Bound proteins were eluted with SDS sample buffer and analyzed by SDS-PAGE. Full-length RanGAP1 interacted specifically with Ubc9 (Fig. 2, lanes 1–3), as did NΔ419/PK (Fig. 2, lanes 7–9). Significantly, both of these proteins are also modified by SUMO-1. Notably, both unmodified and SUMO-1-modified RanGAP1 and NΔ419/PK interacted with Ubc9. In contrast, CΔ23 (Fig. 2, lanes 4–6) and NΔ502/PK (Fig.2, lanes 10–12) did not interact with Ubc9. As apparent inlanes 4 and 10, these same two proteins also failed to be modified by SUMO-1. These results indicate a correlation between the ability of these proteins to interact with Ubc9 and their ability to be modified by SUMO-1. The binding reactions described above were done in the presence of rabbit reticulocyte lysate, making it possible that the observed interaction between Ubc9 and RanGAP1 was indirect. To investigate whether Ubc9 and the carboxyl-terminal domain of RanGAP1 could form a complex in the absence of other factors, we analyzed the proteins by gel filtration chromatography either alone or together after mixing and incubating at room temperature. Bacterially expressed Ubc9 and NΔ419 were purified and individually fractionated by gel filtration chromatography on a Superdex 75 column (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Under these conditions, both proteins eluted as apparent monomers with calculated molecular masses of 20 kDa (Fig.3). When Ubc9 and NΔ419 were incubated together and subsequently fractionated on the same column they co-eluted as an apparent heterodimer with a calculated molecular mass of 40 kDa (Fig. 3). This result demonstrates that Ubc9 and the carboxyl-terminal domain of RanGAP1 interact directly to form a complex and that the complex is sufficiently stable to allow purification by gel filtration chromatography. This result also demonstrates that Ubc9 can bind to RanGAP1 prior to forming a thiol ester with SUMO-1. The precise lysine residues modified by SUMO-1 have been identified in approximately a dozen known substrates (1Melchior F. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2000; 16: 591-626Crossref PubMed Scopus (656) Google Scholar). The majority of these modification sites conform to a consensus sequence that we refer to as the SUMO-1 consensus sequence, or SUMO-1-CS. The SUMO-1-CS is defined by four amino acids with the sequence “ΨKXE,” were Ψ is a large hydrophobic amino acid, K is the lysine residue modified by SUMO-1, X is any amino acid, and E is glutamic acid (Fig. 4). The conservation of residues surrounding the modified lysine suggests that they may be critical for substrate recognition and/or for the selection of the specific lysine residue for SUMO-1 modification. Nearly all of the substrates containing the SUMO-1-CS also interact with Ubc9, suggesting that the SUMO-1-CS may play a role in Ubc9 binding. To address this possibility, we mutated residues surrounding lysine 526 of RanGAP1, including the highly conserved residues conforming to the consensus sequence (Fig.5 A). Individual mutants were analyzed for their ability to be modified by SUMO-1 following translation in rabbit reticulocyte lysate and separation by SDS-PAGE (Fig. 5 B). Approximately one-third of the wild-type protein was converted to the SUMO-1-modified form when translated in rabbit reticulocyte lysate (Fig. 5 B, lane 1). As expected, mutating lysine 526 to arginine or alanine completely inhibited SUMO-1 modification (Fig. 5 B, lanes 5 and 6). Mutating histidine 521 to alanine had a noticeable, but less dramatic effect on SUMO-1 modification (Fig. 5 B, lane 2), whereas substituting alanine for lysine 530 had no effect on SUMO-1 modification (Fig.5 B, lane 8). Most notably, alanine substitutions of leucine residues 524 and 525 (Fig. 5 B, lanes 3 and 4), and glutamic acid 528 (Fig. 5 B, lane 7) completely inhibited SUMO-1 modification. These results demonstrate that conserved residues surrounding the SUMO-1 modification site are critical for efficient SUMO-1 modification.Figure 5Conserved residues of the SUMO-1-CS are essential for SUMO-1 modification. Mutations in the SUMO-1-CS were introduced into the RanGAP1 pyruvate kinase fusion protein NΔ419/PK. Wild-type and mutant proteins were assayed for their ability to be modified by SUMO-1 by transcription and translation in rabbit reticulocyte lysates. Reaction products were analyzed by SDS-PAGE followed by autoradiography. A, amino acid sequences surrounding the SUMO-1-CS of RanGAP1. B, SDS-PAGE analysis of modification assays for wild-type NΔ419/PK (lane 1) and various NΔ419/PK mutant proteins containing point mutations in and around the SUMO-1-CS (lanes 2–8). Protein molecular mass standards are indicated on the left and thebracket on the right indicates SUMO-1-modified proteins.View Large Image Figure ViewerDownload Hi-res image Download (PPT) As indicated above, we observed a correlation between the ability of proteins to interact with Ubc9 and their ability to be modified by SUMO-1. We therefore assayed for whether mutations of the conserved residues surrounding the SUMO-1 modification site of RanGAP1 affected Ubc9 binding. GST-Ubc9 was immobilized on glutathione beads and incubated with 35S-labeled proteins produced byin vitro translation. Bound proteins were eluted with SDS sample buffer and analyzed by SDS-PAGE, or by quantification using a scintillation counter. Four mutations were found to dramatically affect the interaction with Ubc9: leucine 524 to alanine (Fig.6, lanes 7–9), leucine 525 to alanine (Fig. 6, lanes 10–12), lysine 526 to alanine (Fig.6, lanes 13–15), and glutamic acid 528 to alanine (Fig. 6,lanes 19–21). Each of these mutations reduced the interaction with Ubc9 to less than 10% of that observed with the wild-type protein. Mutations of histidine 521 (Fig. 6, lanes 4–6) and lysine 530 (Fig. 6, lanes 22–24) to alanine had only modest affects on Ubc9 binding, reducing the interaction by ∼50 and 30%, respectively. Mutating the actual modification site, lysine 526, to arginine (Fig. 6, lanes 16–18) had no noticeable affect on Ubc9 binding, possibly due to the conservative nature of this amino acid substitution. These results again demonstrate a correlation between Ubc9 binding and SUMO-1 modification: proteins that retained their ability to interact with Ubc9 were modified by SUMO-1 (with the exception of K526R), whereas those that did not bind Ubc9 were not modified by SUMO-1. These results further demonstrate that conserved residues surrounding the SUMO-1 modification site are essential for Ubc9 binding. Despite the apparent role of the SUMO-1-CS (including the targeted lysine) in mediating Ubc9 binding, we observed that SUMO-1 modified RanGAP1 bound to Ubc9 as well as, and possibly better than, unmodified RanGAP1. To investigate whether SUMO-1 itself, after being conjugated to RanGAP1, could contribute to Ubc9 binding, we assayed for the binding of NΔ419/PK to Ubc9 in the presence of increasing concentrations of free SUMO-1. Surprisingly, we found that free SUMO-1 had a significant effect on the binding of SUMO-1-modified RanGAP1 to Ubc9, but had only a modest effect on the binding of unmodified RanGAP1 (Fig. 7). We observed an ∼60% reduction in the binding of SUMO-1-modified RanGAP1 when binding assays were performed in the presence of 3.25 mg/ml SUMO-1 (corresponding to an ∼15-fold excess over immobilized Ubc9) (Fig. 7,lanes 1 and 5). In the same assay, the binding of unmodified RanGAP1 was reduced by less than 20% (Fig. 7, lanes 1 and 5). These findings indicate that Ubc9 interacts with SUMO-1 modified RanGAP1 through SUMO-1, possibly independent of direct interactions with RanGAP1. SUMO-1 modification modulates protein functions by altering protein-protein interactions, protein-DNA interactions, protein subcellular localization, and possibly by directly altering protein activity. It is anticipated that SUMO-1 modification is highly regulated, with substrates being selectively recognized and modified in response to specific cellular signals. Several studies, for example, have demonstrated that SUMO-1-modified proteins vary with changes in the cell cycle (13Li S.J. Hochstrasser M. Nature. 1999; 398: 246-251Crossref PubMed Scopus (608) Google Scholar) and in response to cellular growth conditions (10Mao Y. Desai S.D. Liu L.F. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 26066-26073Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (123) Google Scholar,25Saitoh H. Hinchey J. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 6252-6258Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (694) Google Scholar). However, the mechanisms by which proteins are selectively recognized as substrates for SUMO-1 modification or de-modification and how such mechanisms might be regulated are not yet understood. We have begun to investigate how proteins are recognized as substrates for SUMO-1 modification and present evidence that direct interaction with the E2 enzyme, Ubc9, is an important part of this process. Using a domain derived from a well characterized SUMO-1 substrate, RanGAP1, we have demonstrated that SUMO-1 modification correlates with the ability to directly interact with Ubc9. This domain of RanGAP1 contains a consensus sequence, the SUMO-1-CS, which is found in nearly all known SUMO-1 substrates. The SUMO-1-CS contains the lysine residue to which SUMO-1 is covalently attached, and several highly conserved residues that flank this lysine. Although recognized by several other groups (26Duprez E. Saurin A.J. Desterro J.M. Lallemand-Breitenbach V. Howe K. Boddy M.N. Solomon E. de The H. Hay R.T. Freemont P.S. J. Cell Sci. 1999; 112: 381-393Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 27Rodriguez M.S. Dargemont C. Hay R.T. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 12654-12659Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (129) Google Scholar, 28Sternsdorf T. Jensen K. Reich B. Will H. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 12555-12566Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (220) Google Scholar), the functional significance of the SUMO-1-CS was not previously characterized. To investigate its role in SUMO-1 modification, we made alanine substitutions of the conserved residues in the SUMO-1-CS. These mutations were found to inhibit both Ubc9 binding and SUMO-1 modification. These findings indicate that the SUMO-1-CS plays a direct role in mediating the binding of Ubc9 to SUMO-1 substrates and that this binding is essential for substrate modification. The actual lysine acceptor in the SUMO-1-CS of RanGAP1 is important for the interaction with Ubc9, as an alanine substitution at this position inhibits Ubc9 binding. In apparent contradiction to this finding, it was also observed that SUMO-1-modified RanGAP1 and free RanGAP1 interact equally well with Ubc9. Competition experiments using excess free SUMO-1, however, indicated that modified RanGAP1 likely interacts with Ubc9 through the SUMO-1 moiety. It remains to be determined whether the binding of modified RanGAP1 to Ubc9 is mediated solely through interactions with SUMO-1 or through a combination of interactions with RanGAP1 and SUMO-1. Previous studies have indicated that Ubc9 and free SUMO-1 can form direct, noncovalent interactions (29Liu Q. Jin C. Liao X. Shen Z. Chen D.J. Chen Y. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 16979-16987Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (88) Google Scholar). It will be interesting to determine whether other SUMO-1-modified substrates interact similarly with Ubc9, or whether this interaction is specific for modified RanGAP1. In vivo, Ubc9 is concentrated at the nuclear envelope at sites that overlap with the localization of SUMO-1-modified RanGAP1 (19Lee G.W. Melchior F. Matunis M.J. Mahajan R. Tian Q. Anderson P. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 6503-6507Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (121) Google Scholar). Although Ubc9 has been shown to interact with the nucleoporin Nup358 (18Saitoh H. Sparrow D.B. Shiomi T. Pu R.T. Nishimoto T. Mohun T.J. Dasso M. Curr. Biol. 1998; 8: 121-124Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (162) Google Scholar), it remains to be determined whether this interaction is direct or mediated by SUMO-1-modified RanGAP1. In addition to demonstrating a role for the SUMO-1-CS in Ubc9 binding, we also found that ∼50 amino acids on either side of the consensus sequence were required for Ubc9 binding and SUMO-1 modification. Comparison of the amino acid sequence of this larger domain with other SUMO-1 substrates reveals no obvious homologies outside of the SUMO-1-CS. It therefore remains to be determined whether additional residues outside of the SUMO-1-CS are directly involved in Ubc9 binding, or whether they indirectly affect binding by influencing the proper folding and exposure of a smaller domain containing the SUMO-1-CS. Evidence that the precise position of the SUMO-1 CS within a protein can be an important determinant of its ability to function in SUMO-1 modification is provided by analysis of the heat shock transcription factor, HSF2. HSF2 contains three putative SUMO-1-CS motifs, but is modified at a lysine residue in only one of these motifs (45Goodson, M. L., Hong, Y., Rogers, R., Matunis, M. J., Park-Sarge, O.-K., and Sarge, K. D. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, in press.Google Scholar). The precise position of the SUMO-1-CS within a protein is likely to determine its accessibility and, therefore, its potential to interact with Ubc9. The presence of a SUMO-1-CS in a protein is therefore not an absolute indicator of whether that protein will be a substrate for SUMO-1 modification. Further analysis of the amino acid residues surrounding the SUMO-1-CS and their contributions to Ubc9 binding will be needed to refine the definition of a SUMO-1 substrate. In this particular study, we examined the SUMO-1-CS of RanGAP1, but we propose that the SUMO-1-CS of other SUMO-1 substrates will function similarly to mediate Ubc9 binding and facilitate SUMO-1 modification. Ubc9-binding domains have been partially mapped in a large number of known and putative SUMO-1 substrates. Many of these domains contain SUMO-1-CS motifs, including the Ubc9-binding domains found in WT1 (30Wang Z.Y. Qiu Q.Q. Seufert W. Taguchi T. Testa J.R. Whitmore S.A. Callen D.F. Welsh D. Shenk T. Deuel T.F. J. Biol. Chem. 1996; 271: 24811-24816Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (70) Google Scholar), TEL (31Chakrabarti S.R. Sood R. Ganguly S. Bohlander S. Shen Z. Nucifora G. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 7467-7472Crossref PubMed Scopus (74) Google Scholar), ETS-1 (32Hahn S.L. Wasylyk B. Criqui-Filipe P. Criqui P. Oncogene. 1997; 15: 1489-1495Crossref PubMed Scopus (40) Google Scholar), Dorsal (33Bhaskar V. Valentine S.A. Courey A.J. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 4033-4040Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (88) Google Scholar), p53 (34Shen Z. Pardington-Purtymun P.E. Comeaux J.C. Moyzis R.K. Chen D.J. Genomics. 1996; 37: 183-186Crossref PubMed Scopus (126) Google Scholar), c-Jun (35Gottlicher M. Heck S. Doucas V. Wade E. Kullmann M. Cato A.C. Evans R.M. Herrlich P. Steroids. 1996; 61: 257-262Crossref PubMed Scopus (68) Google Scholar), glucocorticoid receptor (35Gottlicher M. Heck S. Doucas V. Wade E. Kullmann M. Cato A.C. Evans R.M. Herrlich P. Steroids. 1996; 61: 257-262Crossref PubMed Scopus (68) Google Scholar), and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (36Masson M. Menissier-de Murcia J. Mattei M.G. de Murcia G. Niedergang C.P. Gene ( Amst .). 1997; 190: 287-296Crossref PubMed Scopus (32) Google Scholar). Other motifs in addition to the SUMO-1-CS may also mediate Ubc9 binding, however. Most notably, Ubc9 also interacts with the RING domain of PML (26Duprez E. Saurin A.J. Desterro J.M. Lallemand-Breitenbach V. Howe K. Boddy M.N. Solomon E. de The H. Hay R.T. Freemont P.S. J. Cell Sci. 1999; 112: 381-393Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). The functional significance of this interaction remains unclear as mutations that disrupt interactions between Ubc9 and the PML RING domain have very little effect on the SUMO-1 modification of PML (26Duprez E. Saurin A.J. Desterro J.M. Lallemand-Breitenbach V. Howe K. Boddy M.N. Solomon E. de The H. Hay R.T. Freemont P.S. J. Cell Sci. 1999; 112: 381-393Crossref PubMed Google Scholar,37Kamitani T. Kito K. Nguyen H.P. Wada H. Fukuda-Kamitani T. Yeh E.T. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 26675-26682Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (275) Google Scholar). It has also recently been proposed that PEST sequences may play a role in regulating the interaction of Ubc9 with at least some SUMO-1 substrates (1Melchior F. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2000; 16: 591-626Crossref PubMed Scopus (656) Google Scholar, 38Kim Y.H. Choi C.Y. Kim Y. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 12350-12355Crossref PubMed Scopus (143) Google Scholar). Although PEST sequences are best known for their involvement in ubiquitin-mediated proteolysis (39Rechsteiner M. Revis Biol. Celular. 1989; 20: 235-253PubMed Google Scholar), they are found in more than half of the known SUMO-1 substrates. The binding of Ubc9 to the SUMO-1-CS argues against a direct requirement for E3 ligases in SUMO-1 modification. However, it is possible that the modification of substrates with a SUMO-1-CS may be regulated or facilitated by the action of E3-like factors in vivo. Regardless of this consideration, a more detailed analysis of the direct interactions between Ubc9 and the SUMO-1-CS will provide important insights into the mechanisms involved in the ultimate transfer of SUMO-1 to specific substrates. Despite crystallographic studies of ubiquitin E2-E3 complexes (40Huang L. Kinnucan E. Wang G. Beaudenon S. Howley P.M. Huibregtse J.M. Pavletich N.P. Science. 1999; 286: 1321-1326Crossref PubMed Scopus (445) Google Scholar, 41Zheng N. Wang P. Jeffrey P.D. Pavletich N.P. Cell. 2000; 102: 533-539Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (724) Google Scholar), the exact mechanism that underlies the transfer of ubiquitin from upstream factors to protein substrates remains poorly defined. Given the high degree of homology between Ubc9 and ubiquitin E2 enzymes, it is likely that the transfer of SUMO-1 to protein substrates will be very similar to the process of ubiquitination. Detailed characterization of the interactions between Ubc9 and the SUMO-1-CS should, therefore, provide important insights into the mechanisms of both ubiquitination and SUMO-1 modification. It will also be important to further characterize the role of amino acids surrounding the SUMO-1-CS, to determine whether they function indirectly to present an exposed consensus sequence, or whether they are also involved in significant interactions with Ubc9. We thank Janet Cronshaw, Richard Rogers, Maria Vassileva, and Cecile Pickart for comments and suggestions during the course of this work." @default.
• W2031668046 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2031668046 creator A5015102287 @default.
• W2031668046 creator A5018251715 @default.
• W2031668046 creator A5069685948 @default.
• W2031668046 date "2001-06-01" @default.
• W2031668046 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2031668046 title "The Small Ubiquitin-like Modifier-1 (SUMO-1) Consensus Sequence Mediates Ubc9 Binding and Is Essential for SUMO-1 Modification" @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1521408518 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1666755687 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1966761762 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1970042886 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1970061483 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1971656831 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1972166544 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1975658312 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1976875498 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1977558343 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1978339876 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1978567376 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1981243923 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1988841577 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W1999054610 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2004214053 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2004722555 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2008798771 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2009856824 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2015291446 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2020527627 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2024135682 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2024935012 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2040624923 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2041745051 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2041968244 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2046037983 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2052861371 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2067371211 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2072339454 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2073148985 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2080253509 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2080485991 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2081469183 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2120765611 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2122044343 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2132147221 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2136220836 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2153569873 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2160231441 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2166987747 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2169532909 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2172298521 @default.
• W2031668046 cites W2326049019 @default.
• W2031668046 doi "https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.m100006200" @default.
• W2031668046 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11259410" @default.
• W2031668046 hasPublicationYear "2001" @default.
• W2031668046 type Work @default.
• W2031668046 sameAs 2031668046 @default.
• W2031668046 citedByCount "470" @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462012 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462013 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462014 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462015 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462016 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462017 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462018 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462019 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462020 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462021 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462022 @default.
• W2031668046 countsByYear W20316680462023 @default.
• W2031668046 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2031668046 hasAuthorship W2031668046A5015102287 @default.
• W2031668046 hasAuthorship W2031668046A5018251715 @default.
• W2031668046 hasAuthorship W2031668046A5069685948 @default.
• W2031668046 hasBestOaLocation W20316680461 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C144519050 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C167625842 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C171350616 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C25602115 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C2778112365 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C54985914 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C70721500 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConcept C95444343 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C104317684 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C144519050 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C167625842 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C171350616 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C185592680 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C25602115 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C2778112365 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C54985914 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C55493867 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C70721500 @default.
• W2031668046 hasConceptScore W2031668046C86803240 @default.

• next