Ter­mi­nal Pro­teins: Cross­ing the Bor­der

by Merry

A va­ri­ety of Bac­te­ria, Ar­chaea, and mo­bile ge­netic el­e­ments repli­cate their DNA as a lin­ear chro­mo­some us­ing ter­mi­nal pro­teins (TPs) to prime DNA syn­the­sis, thus solv­ing their end repli­ca­tion prob­lem. As de­scribed in an ear­lier post, phage φ29 uses its TPs to also or­ga­nize the sites of DNA repli­ca­tion for greater ef­fi­ciency. The N‑terminal do­main (N‑td) of Its TP lo­cal­izes both the in­com­ing phage chro­mo­some and the phage TP-DNA poly­merase het­erodimer to the host cell nu­cleoid.

Fig­ure 1. Trans­mis­sion elec­tron mi­cro­graph of Weis­sella cibaria (Fir­mi­cutes) phage φYS61, a rel­a­tive of φ29. Mag­ni­fi­ca­tion: x200,000. Source

The use­ful­ness of TPs for φ29 and other phages is clear, but there is an­other as­pect that is puz­zling. Anal­o­gously, some eu­kary­otic viruses, such as the ade­n­oviruses in­fect­ing us and other ver­te­brates, em­ploy nu­clear lo­cal­iza­tion sig­nals (NLSs) to en­tice the cell to im­port the vi­ral chro­mo­some into the nu­cleus. Fur­ther, it is known that both eu­kary­otic NLSs and the N‑tds of phage TPs char­ac­ter­is­ti­cally con­tain a large per­cent­age of ba­sic amino acids. On a hunch, a group of re­searchers screened the TP se­quences of ten phages and one ar­chaeal virus in sil­ico for rec­og­niz­able NLSs. Their search iden­ti­fied pu­ta­tive NLSs in eight of these eleven TPs.

Fig­ure 2. Nu­clear tar­get­ing of TPs from di­verse phages. Con­fo­cal im­ages of rep­re­sen­ta­tive COS‑7 cells ex­press­ing the seven in­di­cated 2YFP fu­sions (to wild-type φ29, Nf, GA‑1, PRD1, Bam35, Cp‑1, and ABV TPs), five of which demon­strated nu­clear lo­cal­iza­tion. Shown are YFP (green), DAPI (red), and YFP merged with DAPI im­ages. Source

When they trans­fected these eight into mam­malian COS‑1 cells, five of the pro­teins lo­cal­ized to the nu­cleus. For the trans­fec­tions they used 2YFP-TP fu­sion pro­teins, i.e., they at­tached two YFPs to each TP to yield flu­o­res­cently-tagged pro­teins that were 75 − 85 kDa. Their size is sig­nif­i­cant be­cause nu­clear pores gen­er­ally ex­clude pas­sage of pro­teins >50 kDa. Given their size, and given that their nu­clear lo­cal­iza­tion was found to be en­ergy-de­pen­dent, these TPs seem to rely on the ac­tive im­port path­way used by eu­kary­otic cells to trans­port se­lected pro­teins into the nu­cleus. Granted, this tac­tic for nu­clear en­try was known for eu­kary­otic viruses and for bac­te­ria (e.g., Agrobac­terium), but these are phages.

A gene de­liv­ery ser­vice?

Ad­di­tional work by these re­searchers demon­strated the po­ten­tial use­ful­ness of these TPs to us as a tool for gene de­liv­ery into the nu­clei of mam­malian cells. Gen­er­ally the nu­clear mem­brane blocks the pas­sage of DNA frag­ments longer than ~300 bp. This bar­rier is of­ten cited as one of the rea­sons for the less fre­quent move­ment of genes from prokary­otes to eu­kary­otes via hor­i­zon­tal gene trans­fer (HGT). Per­haps larger DNA frag­ments with NLS-con­tain­ing TPs at­tached would read­ily cross that ob­sta­cle. To test this, they uti­lized an in vitro sys­tem to syn­the­size het­erol­o­gous DNA mol­e­cules (5.3 kb) with the φ29 TP at­tached to each 5' end. Pres­ence of the TPs in­creased the nu­clear en­try three- to four­fold. Since that in­crease might be due to pro­tec­tion of the DNA from ex­onu­cle­ase degra­da­tion, they ran an­other con­trol us­ing pro­teinase K-treated TP-DNA. This treat­ment — that re­moved the NLS but left short, pro­tec­tive pep­tides at­tached to both DNA ends — markedly de­creased the nu­clear trans­port.

Fig­ure 3. Scan­ning elec­tron mi­cro­scopic pic­ture  (freeze-frac­ture tech­nique) of the in­ner (up­per left sec­tion) and outer (lower right) mem­brane of an eu­kary­otic cell nu­cleus with nu­clear pores (Scale not given). Source

Given these ob­ser­va­tions in the lab, the au­thors spec­u­lated a bit and pro­posed a model in which phage TPs ex­pe­dited hor­i­zon­tal gene trans­fer (HGT) from bac­te­ria to eu­kary­otes in na­ture. Men­tion of prokary­ote-to-eu­kary­ote HGT brings to mind gene ac­qui­si­tion from or­ganelles and en­dosym­bionts, but a broader per­spec­tive was en­cour­aged by Doolit­tle in 1993 in a pa­per with a catchy ti­tle: You are what you eat. Pic­ture a gazil­lion phagotrophic pro­tists din­ing on a mil­lion gazil­lion bac­te­ria. Said bac­te­ria might con­tain nu­mer­ous ac­tively repli­cat­ing phages. In the process, phages fre­quently re­com­bine (usu­ally il­le­git­i­mately) with one an­other or with host DNA, oc­ca­sion­ally in­cor­po­rat­ing a bac­te­r­ial gene into their chro­mo­some. If that phage uses TPs, then as the bac­terium is di­gested, the phage chro­mo­some, its ends pro­tected from ex­onu­cle­ases by 5'-TPs, might make its way out of the lyso­some and into the nu­cleus, there to re­com­bine with host DNA. The prob­a­bil­ity of some use­ful bit of DNA from din­ner mak­ing it into the nu­cleus and thence into the cell's chro­mo­some is ex­ceed­ingly small even with TPs at­tached, but, given the num­ber of phages, bac­te­ria, and pro­tists, such events be­come likely over evo­lu­tion­ary time. When you con­sider that some lin­ear plas­mids and trans­pos­able el­e­ments also have TPs, even more op­por­tu­ni­ties for TP courier ser­vice arise. Makes me won­der if there might in­deed be some­thing evo­lu­tion­ar­ily sig­nif­i­cant lurk­ing here.

Even more I won­der what would be the fit­ness ben­e­fit of an NLS in a phage TP. Muñoz-Es­pín, one of the re­searchers, sug­gests an in­trigu­ing pos­si­bil­ity (per­sonal com­mu­ni­ca­tion): "The emer­gence of the eu­kary­otic cell dur­ing evo­lu­tion pre­sented viruses with a new chal­lenge: how to pen­e­trate the nu­clear en­ve­lope to ac­cess cel­lu­lar metabo­lites and ma­chin­ery needed for their own repli­ca­tion. It is tempt­ing to spec­u­late that, in the case of phages that repli­cate us­ing pro­tein primers, the pres­ence of NLSs within the TPs might have fa­cil­i­tated the en­try of both the vi­ral genome (with parental TPs at both ends) and the TP-DNA pol het­erodimer into the cell nu­cleus, the site of repli­ca­tion. In sup­port of this sce­nario, eu­kary­otic ade­n­oviruses and phage PRD1 — both of which use pro­tein-primer DNA repli­ca­tion — have been pos­tu­lated to share a com­mon an­ces­tor based on struc­tural sim­i­lar­i­ties of their ma­jor cap­sid pro­teins and their over­all virion ar­chi­tec­ture. Fur­ther, there is ev­i­dence that the NLSs and DNA-bind­ing do­mains in the TPs also share a com­mon ori­gin, sug­gest­ing that evo­lu­tion adapted ex­ist­ing DNA-bind­ing mech­a­nisms to di­rect DNA into the new nu­clear lo­ca­tion."

Still I won­der why these NLSs have been main­tained in some phage genomes since the orig­i­na­tion of the eu­kary­otic cell so long ago.

Nota: Agradezco a Dani Muñoz-Es­pín por sus dis­cu­siones prove­chosas y re­visión de mis es­bo­zos.

 

Ref­er­ences

  • Muñoz-Es­pín, D, Holguera I, Balles­teros-Plaza D, Car­ballido-López R, Salas M. 2010. Vi­ral ter­mi­nal pro­tein di­rects early or­ga­ni­za­tion of phage DNA repli­ca­tion at the bac­te­r­ial nu­cleoid. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 107 (38), 16548–16553. PMID 20823229
  • Re­drejo-Ro­dríguez M, Muñoz-Es­pín D, Holguera I, Mencía M, Salas M. 2013. Nu­clear lo­cal­iza­tion sig­nals in phage ter­mi­nal pro­teins pro­vide a novel gene de­liv­ery tool in mam­malian cells. Com­mun In­tegr Biol, 6 (2), e22829. PMID 23750294

 

Other Posts