Quantitative time-resolved analysis reveals intricate, differential regulation of standard- and immuno-proteasomes

eLife

Volumn 4, Issue September, 2015, Pages

  Liepe, Juliane ^a   Holzhütter, Hermann Georg ^b   Bellavista, Elena ^c   Kloetzel, Peter M ^b   Stumpf, Michael P H ^a   Mishto, Michele ^b,c  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROTEASOME;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; ENZYME ACTIVE SITE; ENZYME ACTIVITY; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; METABOLISM; MICHAELIS MENTEN KINETICS; NEGATIVE FEEDBACK; NONHUMAN; PEPTIDE SYNTHESIS; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN DEGRADATION; PROTEIN HYDROLYSIS; PROTEIN PURIFICATION; PROTEIN TRANSPORT; REGULATORY MECHANISM; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CELL LINE; ENZYMOLOGY; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; HUMAN; KINETICS; LIVER; MOUSE;

ANIMALS; CELL LINE; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; HUMANS; KINETICS; LIVER; MICE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PROTEASOME ENDOPEPTIDASE COMPLEX; PROTEIN TRANSPORT; PROTEOLYSIS;

EID: 84944788684     PISSN: None     EISSN: 2050084X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.07545.001     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Aiken CT, Kaake RM, Wang X, Huang L. 2011. Oxidative stress-mediated regulation of proteasome complexes. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 10:R110 006924. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M110.006924.
2. Arciniega M, Beck P, Lange OF, Groll M, Huber R. 2014. Differential global structural changes in the core particle of yeast and mouse proteasome induced by ligand binding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA 111:9479-9484. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1408018111.
3. Babtie AC, Kirk P, Stumpf MP. 2014. Topological sensitivity analysis for systems biology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA 111:18507-18512. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1414026112.
4. Basler M, Kirk CJ, Groettrup M. 2013. The immunoproteasome in antigen processing and other immunological functions. Current Opinion in Immunology 25:74-80. doi: 10.1016/j.coi.2012.11.004.
5. Bellavista E, Andreoli F, Parenti MD, Martucci M, Santoro A, Salvioli S, Capri M, Baruzzi A, Del Rio A, Franceschi C, Mishto M. 2013. Immunoproteasome in cancer and neuropathologies: a new therapeutic target? Current Pharmaceutical Design 19:702-718. doi: 10.2174/138161213804581927.
6. Ben-Nissan G, Sharon M. 2014. Regulating the 20S proteasome ubiquitin-independent degradation pathway. Biomolecules 4:862-884. doi: 10.3390/biom4030862.
7. Borissenko L, Groll M. 2007. Diversity of proteasomal missions: fine tuning of the immune response. Biological Chemistry 388:947-955. doi: 10.1515/BC.2007.109.
8. Buchholz VR, Flossdorf M, Hensel I, Kretschmer L,Weissbrich B, Gräf P, Verschoor A, Schiemann M, Höfer T, Busch DH. 2013. Disparate individual fates compose robust CD8+ T cell immunity. Science 340:630-635. doi: 10.1126/ science.1235454.
9. Cascio P. 2014. PA28αβ: the enigmatic magic ring of the proteasome? Biomolecules 4:566-584. doi: 10.3390/ biom4020566.
10. Chondrogianni N, Georgila K, Kourtis N, Tavernarakis N, Gonos ES. 2014. 20S proteasome activation promotes life span extension and resistance to proteotoxicity in Caenorhabditis elegans. FASEB Journal 29:611-622. doi: 10.1096/fj.14-252189.
11. Deol P, Zaiss DM, Monaco JJ, Sijts AJ. 2007. Rates of processing determine the immunogenicity of immunoproteasome-generated epitopes. The Journal of Immunology 178:7557-7562. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol. 178.12.7557.
12. Dick TP, Ruppert T, Groettrup M, Kloetzel PM, Kuehn L, Koszinowski UH, Stevanović S, Schild H, Rammensee HG. 1996. Coordinated dual cleavages induced by the proteasome regulator PA28 lead to dominant MHC ligands. Cell 86:253-262. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80097-5.
13. Emmerich NP, Nussbaum AK, Stevanovic S, Priemer M, Toes RE, Rammensee HG, Schild H. 2000. The human 26 S and 20 S proteasomes generate overlapping but different sets of peptide fragments from a model protein substrate. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 275:21140-21148. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M000740200.
14. Fabre B, Lambour T, Garrigues L, Amalric F, Vigneron N, Menneteau T, Stella A, Monsarrat B, Van den Eynde B, Burlet-Schiltz O, Bousquet-Dubouch MP. 2015. Deciphering preferential interactions within supramolecular protein complexes: the proteasome case. Molecular Systems Biology 11:771. doi: 10.15252/msb.20145497.
15. Gaczynska M, Rock KL, Goldberg AL. 1993. Gamma-interferon and expression of MHC genes regulate peptide hydrolysis by proteasomes. Nature 365:264-267. doi: 10.1038/365264a0.
16. Gerlach C, Rohr JC, Perié L, van Rooij N, van Heijst JW, Velds A, Urbanus J, Naik SH, Jacobs H, Beltman JB, de Boer RJ, Schumacher TN. 2013. Heterogeneous differentiation patterns of individual CD8+ T cells. Science 340:635-639. doi: 10.1126/science.1235487.
17. Gillette TG, Kumar B, Thompson D, Slaughter CA, DeMartino GN. 2008. Differential roles of the COOH termini of AAA subunits of PA700 (19 S regulator) in asymmetric assembly and activation of the 26 S proteasome. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 283:31813-31822. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M805935200.
18. Grima R, Walter NG, Schnell S. 2014. Single-molecule enzymology a la Michaelis-Menten. The FEBS Journal 281:518-530. doi: 10.1111/febs.12663.
19. Höhn TJ, Grune T. 2014. The proteasome and the degradation of oxidized proteins: part III-Redox regulation of the proteasomal system. Redox Biology 2:388-394. doi: 10.1016/j.redox.2013.12.029.
20. Huber EM, Basler M, Schwab R, Heinemeyer W, Kirk CJ, Groettrup M, Groll M. 2012. Immuno- and constitutive proteasome crystal structures reveal differences in substrate and inhibitor specificity. Cell 148:727-738. doi: 10. 1016/j.cell.2011.12.030.
21. Hutschenreiter S, Tinazli A, Model K, Tampé R. 2004. Two-substrate association with the 20S proteasome at single-molecule level. The EMBO Journal 23:2488-2497. doi: 10.1038/sj.emboj.7600262.
22. Kapeta S, Chondrogianni N, Gonos ES. 2010. Nuclear erythroid factor 2-mediated proteasome activation delays senescence in human fibroblasts. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 285:8171-8184. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M109. 031575.
23. Kirk P, Thorne T, Stumpf MP. 2013. Model selection in systems and synthetic biology. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 24:767-774. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2013.03.012.
24. Kisselev AF, Callard A, Goldberg AL. 2006. Importance of the different proteolytic sites of the proteasome and the efficacy of inhibitors varies with the protein substrate. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 281:8582-8590. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M509043200.
25. Kisselev AF, Garcia-Calvo M, Overkleeft HS, Peterson E, Pennington MW, Ploegh HL, Thornberry NA, Goldberg AL. 2003. The caspase-like sites of proteasomes, their substrate specificity, new inhibitors and substrates, and allosteric interactions with the trypsin-like sites. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 278:35869-35877. doi: 10. 1074/jbc.M303725200.
26. Kisselev AF, Groettrup M. 2014. Subunit specific inhibitors of proteasomes and their potential for immunomodulation. Current Opinion in Chemical Biology 23:16-22. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2014.08.012.
27. Kisselev AF, Kaganovich D, Goldberg AL. 2002. Binding of hydrophobic peptides to several non-catalytic sites promotes peptide hydrolysis by all active sites of 20 S proteasomes. Evidence for peptide-induced channel opening in the alpha-rings. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 277:22260-22270. doi: 10.1074/jbc. M112360200.
28. Köhler A, Cascio P, Leggett DS, Woo KM, Goldberg AL, Finley D. 2001. The axial channel of the proteasome core particle is gated by the Rpt2 ATPase and controls both substrate entry and product release. Molecular Cell 7:1143-1152. doi: 10.1016/S1097-2765(01)00274-X.
29. Liepe J, Filippi S, Komorowski M, Stumpf MP. 2013. Maximizing the information content of experiments in systems biology. PLOS Computational Biology 9:e1002888. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002888.
30. Liepe J, Holzhütter H, Bellavista E, Kloetzel PM, Stumpf MPH, Mishto M. 2015. Data from: Quantitative timeresolved analysis reveals intricate, differential regulation of standard- and immuno-proteasomes. Dryad Digital Repository. doi: 10.5061/dryad.nk453.
31. Liepe J, Holzhütter HG, Kloetzel PM, Stumpf MP, Mishto M. 2014a. Modelling proteasome and proteasome regulator activities. Biomolecules 4:585-599. doi: 10.3390/biom4020585.
32. Liepe J, Kirk P, Filippi S, Toni T, Barnes CP, Stumpf MP. 2014b. A framework for parameter estimation and model selection from experimental data in systems biology using approximate Bayesian computation. Nature Protocols 9:439-456. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2014.025.
33. Liepe J, Taylor H, Barnes CP, Huvet M, Bugeon L, Thorne T, Lamb JR, Dallman MJ, Stumpf MP. 2012. Calibrating spatio-temporal models of leukocyte dynamics against in vivo live-imaging data using approximate Bayesian computation. Integrative Biology 4:335-345. doi: 10.1039/c2ib00175f.
34. May RM. 2004. Uses and abuses of mathematics in biology. Science 303:790-793. doi: 10.1126/science.1094442.
35. Mishto M, Goede A, Taube KT, Keller C, Janek K, Henklein P, Niewienda A, Kloss A, Gohlke S, Dahlmann B, Enenkel C, Kloetzel PM. 2012. Driving forces of proteasome-catalyzed peptide splicing in yeast and humans. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 11:1008-1023. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M112.020164.
36. Mishto M, Liepe J, Textoris-Taube K, Keller C, Henklein P, Weberruss M, Dahlmann B, Enenkel C, Voigt A, Kuckelkorn U, Stumpf MP, Kloetzel PM. 2014. Proteasome isoforms exhibit only quantitative differences in cleavage and epitope generation. European Journal of Immunology 44:3508-3521. doi: 10.1002/eji. 201444902.
37. Mishto M, Santoro A, Bellavista E, Sessions R, Textoris-Taube K, Dal Piaz F, Carrard G, Forti K, Salvioli S, Friguet B, Kloetzel PM, Rivett AJ, Franceschi C. 2006. A structural model of 20S immunoproteasomes: effect of LMP2 codon 60 polymorphism on expression, activity, intracellular localisation and insight into the regulatory mechanisms. Biological Chemistry 387:417-429. doi: 10.1515/BC.2006.056.
38. Nurse P. 2003. Systems biology: understanding cells. Nature 424:883. doi: 10.1038/424883a.
39. Osmulski PA, Hochstrasser M, Gaczynska M. 2009. A tetrahedral transition state at the active sites of the 20S proteasome is coupled to opening of the alpha-ring channel. Structure 17:1137-1147. doi: 10.1016/j.str. 2009.06.011.
40. Peters LZ, Karmon O, David-Kadoch G, Hazan R, Yu T, Glickman MH, Ben-Aroya S. 2015. The protein quality control machinery regulates its misassembled proteasome subunits. PLOS Genetics 11:e1005178. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pgen.1005178.
41. Pickering AM, Davies KJ. 2012. Degradation of damaged proteins: the main function of the 20S proteasome. Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science 109:227-248. doi: 10.1016/ B978-0-12-397863-9.00006-7.
42. Pickering AM, Lehr M, Miller RA. 2015. Lifespan of mice and primates correlates with immunoproteasome expression. The Journal of Clinical Investigation 125:2059-2068. doi: 10.1172/JCI80514.
43. Raule M, Cerruti F, Benaroudj N, Migotti R, Kikuchi J, Bachi A, Navon A, Dittmar G, Cascio P. 2014. PA28αβ reduces size and increases hydrophilicity of 20S immunoproteasome peptide products. Chemistry & Biology 21:470-480. doi: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2014.02.006.
44. Ruschak AM, Kay LE. 2012. Proteasome allostery as a population shift between interchanging conformers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA 109:E3454-E3462. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1213640109.
45. Ruschak AM, Religa TL, Breuer S, Witt S, Kay LE. 2010. The proteasome antechamber maintains substrates in an unfolded state. Nature 467:868-871. doi: 10.1038/nature09444.
46. Sanft KR, Gillespie DT, Petzold LR. 2011. Legitimacy of the stochastic Michaelis-Menten approximation. IET Systems Biology 5:58. doi: 10.1049/iet-syb.2009.0057.
47. Schmidtke G, Emch S, Groettrup M, Holzhütter HG. 2000. Evidence for the existence of a non-catalytic modifier site of peptide hydrolysis by the 20 S proteasome. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 275:22056-22063. doi: 10. 1074/jbc.M002513200.
48. Schnell S, Maini PK. 2003. A Century of enzyme kinetics: reliability of the KM and vmax estimates. Comments on Theoretical Biology 8:169-187. doi: 10.1080/08948550302453.
49. Schwartz AL, Ciechanover A. 2009. Targeting proteins for destruction by the ubiquitin system: implications for human pathobiology. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology 49:73-96. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox. 051208.165340.
50. Sharon M, Witt S, Felderer K, Rockel B, Baumeister W, Robinson CV. 2006. 20S proteasomes have the potential to keep substrates in store for continual degradation. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 281:9569-9575. doi: 10. 1074/jbc.M511951200.
51. Shen J. 1999. A direct method of calculating sensitivity coefficients of chemical kinetics. The Journal of Chemical Physics 111:7209-7214. doi: 10.1063/1.480049.
52. Stein RL, Melandri F, Dick L. 1996. Kinetic characterization of the chymotryptic activity of the 20S proteasome. Biochemistry 35:3899-3908. doi: 10.1021/bi952262x.
53. Sunnaker M, Zamora-Sillero E, Dechant R, Ludwig C, Busetto AG, Wagner A, Stelling J. 2003. Automatic generation of predictive dynamic models reveals nuclear phosphorylation as the key Msn2 control mechanism. Science Signaling 6:ra41. doi: 10.1126/scisignal.2003621.
54. Toni T, Welch D, Strelkowa N, Ipsen A, Stumpf MP. 2009. Approximate Bayesian computation scheme for parameter inference and model selection in dynamical systems. Journal of the Royal Society, Interface 6:187-202. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2008.0172.
55. Vigneron N, Stroobant V, Chapiro J, Ooms A, Degiovanni G, Morel S, van der Bruggen P, Boon T, Van den Eynde BJ. 2004. An antigenic peptide produced by peptide splicing in the proteasome. Science 304:587-590. doi: 10. 1126/science.1095522.
56. Wu WH, Wang FS, Chang MS. 2008. Dynamic sensitivity analysis of biological systems. BMC Bioinformatics 12:Suppl 9S17. doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-9-S12-S17.
57. Zanker D, Waithman J, Yewdell JW, Chen W. 2013. Mixed proteasomes function to increase viral peptide diversity and broaden antiviral CD8+ T cell responses. The Journal of Immunology 191:52-59. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol. 1300802.