| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Cell, Tumor, and Stem Cell Biology |
Regulates Centrosome Splitting through Nek2
1 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia Health System and 2 Center for Cell Signaling, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia
Requests for reprints: James M. Larner, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 800383, Charlottesville, VA 22908. Phone: 434-924-5564; Fax: 434-982-3262; E-mail: jml2p{at}virginia.edu.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
and PP1
coimmunoprecipitated with Nek2, only PP1
regulated Nek2 function. Ionizing radiation inhibited Nek2 activity, and this response was dependent on ATM and on PP1 binding to Nek2 and coincident with Thr320 dephosphorylation of PP1. Radiation-induced inhibition of centrosome splitting was abrogated in cells expressing Nek2 mutated in the PP1-binding motif outside the kinase domain. Conversely, cells depleted of PP1
by small interfering RNA showed enhanced centrosome splitting and loss of radiation-induced inhibition of centrosome splitting. The identification of a PP1-specific isoform mediating a checkpoint response opens up the possibility of selectively targeting phosphatases as novel radiation sensitizers. [Cancer Res 2007;67(3):10829] | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Nek2 is a core component of centrosomes and a regulator of centrosome splitting. Nek2 is a cell cycledependent serine/threonine kinase, structurally related to NIMA (never in mitosis A) of the filamentous fungus Aspergilllus nidulans. Nek2 protein levels and activity increase in S-G2 phase and are reduced following mitotic arrest. Overexpression of Nek2 induces premature centrosome splitting, which is thought to be achieved by phosphorylating centrosome cohesion proteins C-Nap1 and Rootletin (8, 9). These coiled-coil domain-containing proteins provide a docking site for a dynamic linker structure that tethers parental centrioles. Injection of anti-C-Nap1 antibodies in cells at any phase of the cell cycle promotes centrosome splitting. This observation suggests that C-Nap1 is the downstream effector of Nek2 to regulate centrosome splitting, and that interfering with C-Nap1 function results in premature centrosome splitting during any phase of the cell cycle (9). Nek2 overexpression not only promotes centrosome splitting but also induces multiple centrosomes in HBL100 cells (10). Nek2 itself is regulated by phosphorylation as its activity increases with autophosphorylation and the phosphatase inhibitors and decreases with overexpression of PP1. Yeast two-hybrid analysis and coimmunoprecipitation in mammalian cells showed that Nek2 can form a complex in vitro and in vivo with PP1 using a canonical recognition sequence KVHF (6, 11).
PP1 is an abundant serine/threonine phosphatase, which has diverse functions in cellular metabolism, transcription, and cell cycle progression. The specificity of its various function is achieved in large part through different subunits, which generally bind to PP1 using a (R/K)VXF motif. These include GM, MYPT1, NIPP1 (nuclear inhibitor of PP1), Nek2, and PNUTS (PP1 nuclear targeting subunit). PP1 is present as three isoforms in mammalian somatic cells. The isoforms show no significant difference in cellular distribution in interphase cells (12). However, at mitosis, PP1
localizes to the centrosome, whereas PP1ß/
and PP1
localize in chromosomes and microtubules of the mitotic spindle, respectively. Premature centrosome splitting is triggered by both overexpression of Nek2 and inhibition of PP1 (13). Therefore, PP1 is believed to be the physiologic antagonist of Nek2. Although ionizing radiationinduced inhibition of centrosome splitting is thought to be mediated by Nek2 (14, 15), the involvement of PP1 in control of Nek2 in the presence and absence of radiation is unclear.
We have previously shown that PP1 is activated via dephosphorylation by ionizing radiation in an ATM-dependent manner (16), and because PP1 regulates Nek2, we used ionizing radiation to examine the relationship between PP1 and Nek2. We first asked if PP1 binding with Nek2 is isoform specific, and whether PP1 is essential for ionizing radiation inhibition of Nek2 activity. Our observations reveal that (a) both PP1
and PP1
are coimmunoprecipitated with Nek2. (b) PP1
regulates not only Nek2 activity and centrosome splitting but also centrosome duplication in an isoform-specific manner, and (c) ionizing radiation regulates centrosome splitting through PP1
. These results show for the first time that ATM signals to Nek2 through PP1
.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Plasmid and antibody. Full-length Nek2 was prepared by reverse transcription-PCR using mRNA prepared from HeLa cells and was subcloned into the BamHI-EcoRI sites of the pRK7-HA3 mammalian expression vector, with an NH2-terminal triple-hemagglutinin (HA) epitope tag (sequence YPYDVPDYA). Double mutant Nek2-AA was prepared by mutation of Phe386 to alanine and Val384 to alanine at the PP1-binding motif of Nek2, KVHF (6). Nek2KD was prepared by single mutation of lysine 37 to arginine at the kinase domain of Nek2. The following commercial antibodies were used: antiphospho-PP1
(Thr320) antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, Inc., Beverly, MA), anti-Ku86, anti-PP1, anti-HA monoclonal antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA), anti-Nek2, anti-PP1
(sc6104, Santa Cruz Biotechnology), anti-PP1ß/
(sc6106, Santa Cruz Biotechnology), anti-PP1
polyclonal antibody (sc6108, Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and anti-
-tubulin polyclonal antibody (Sigma, Inc., St. Louis, MO).
Radiation treatment. Cell cultures were irradiated with a Varian linear accelerator at a dose rate of 1.48 Gy per minute. During irradiation, the cultures were maintained in a container designed to mimic the conditions of the cell culture incubator (5% CO2 and 95% air at 37°C).
Immunoprecipitation and in vitro kinase assays. COS-7 cells or pairs of mutant and corrected AT cells (FT/pEBS and FT/pYZ5) in 100-mm dishes were transfected using FuGENE (Roche Molecular Biochemicals, Indianapolis, IN) with 8 µg of plasmid for NH2-terminally triple HA-tagged wild-type and mutant Nek2 (referred to as Nek2 and Nek2-AA), respectively, as described in the manufacturer's instructions (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). Cells were incubated for 16 h followed by irradiation with 10 Gy, harvested at indicated time points, and lysed in 1 mL PBS lysis buffer (17), 0.5% (v/v) Triton X-100, 0.5 mmol/L EDTA, 1 mmol/L DTT, 0.2 mmol/L sodium vanadate, and protease inhibitors. Aliquots of 0.5 mg were mixed with 4 µg of monoclonal anti-HA antibody, and bound proteins were recovered by binding to 15 µL of protein-A agarose (Sigma). Nek2 activity was assayed in the immunoprecipitates in 20 µL of reaction mixture containing 25 mmol/L MOPS (pH 7.2), 10 mmol/L MgCl2, 1 mmol/L DTT, and 0.4 mmol/L Pefabloc plus 0.2 mg/mL myelin basic protein (Sigma) and 0.1 mmol/L
-32P-ATP (1 µCi/nmol) as substrates. After incubation at room temperature for 30 min, samples were separated by 12% SDS-PAGE gel and transferred to nitrocellulose or analyzed using ImageQuant software of PhosphorImager (Amersham Biosciences, Piscataway, NJ). Densitometry quantitative Western blot was analyzed by ImageJ software provided by NIH.
Western blot analyses. Whole-cell extract or proteins recovered from immunoprecipitation beads were separated by 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gels and transferred (with Tris/glycine/methanol buffer, 0.6 A for 6 h) to nitrocellulose. Immunoblot analysis was done with anti-HA antibody, anti-Nek2 antibody, anti-PP1c, antiphospho-specific PP1 at T320, or antispecific PP1
/ß/
isoform. Proteins were detected with horseradish peroxidaseconjugated antibodies. Blots were developed using an enhanced chemiluminescence kit (Amersham Biosciences).
Centrosome-splitting assay. A 100-mm plate of COS-7 cells or HeLa cells was split 1:8 onto fibronectin-coated 22 x 22 mm coverslips seated in 35-mm tissue culture dishes. Cultures were incubated at 37°C for at least 6 h before transfection. Each 35-mm culture was transfected with 1 µg of either empty vector plasmid or plasmid encoding wild-type or mutant HA3-Nek2 using 3 µL of FuGENE 6 (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) in serum-free DMEM following the manufacturer's instructions. Cells were incubated for 72 h, followed by irradiation with 10 Gy, then fixed as described below to preserve microtubule structure at indicated time points. Cells were stained with antibodies directed against either HA or endogenous
-tubulin. A stage micrometer was used to calibrate the measurement tool in Openlab software (at x60, 48 pixels = 10 µm; Improvision, Coventry, United Kingdom). Centrosome distances in transfected cells were measured directly from contrast-enhanced images of
-tubulin staining using the calibrated measuring tool. Only those cells with two clearly distinguished foci of
-tubulin staining were included in the analyses.
Immunofluorescence microscopy. Cells were rinsed once with 1.2 x PEM (1 mol/L PIPES, 50 mmol/L EGTA, and 20 mmol/L MgCl2) at 37°C, fixed with methanol at 20°C for 3 min, rinsed twice again with 1.2 x PEM, and permeabilized with 0.1% Triton X-100 in 1.2 x PEM for 5 min at room temperature. Cells were rinsed thrice with PBS and incubated in 3% bovine serum albumin (BSA) in PBS blocking solution for 1 h at room temperature. Mouse anti-HA monoclonal, rabbit anti-
-tubulin polyclonal were diluted in 3% BSA-containing PBS and applied to the coverslips for at least 1 h at room temperature or overnight at 4°C. Cells were rinsed thrice with PBST for 5 min each before staining with the appropriate secondary antibodies, including rhodamine-conjugated goat anti-rabbit, Oregon Green 488-conjugated goat anti-mouse, diluted in 3% BSA-containing PBS and 1 µg/mL Hoechst 33342 nuclear stain for 1 h at room temperature. Coverslips were rinsed again five times with PBST as described above and mounted onto glass slides with 10 µL of Vectashield mounting medium (Vector Laboratories, Inc., Burlingame, CA). Background staining was determined by preparing identical coverslips without primary antibody. Images of fixed cells were captured using a Nikon fluorescence microscope (Microphoto-SA) with Openlab software, which was equipped with a Nikon Plan Apo x60/1.4 oil immersion objective; filter sets for FITC, Texas Red, and 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole fluorophores; and a Hamamatsu Orca C4742-95 digital camera. Raw data images were converted to 8-bit tiff images in Openlab.
RNA interference assay. For RNA interference (RNAi) assay, 5 x 105 HeLa cells were seeded in each well of a six-well plate overnight. Cells were washed with PBS and serum-free medium one time each, followed by transfection with PP1 isoform-specific small interfering RNA (siRNA) oligonucleotides (smart pool, Dharmacon, Inc., Lafayette, CO) using TransIT-TKO transfection reagent (Mirus, Inc., Madison, WI) as described in product instruction; non-target siRNA was taken as control. Briefly, 20 µL TransIT-TKO were diluted in 250 serum-free medium and incubated for 15 min at room temperature after complete mix. Then, 50 nmol/L (final concentration) siRNA oligonucleotides were added in the diluted TransIT-TKO solution and incubated for additional 15 min, and the mixture was added to each well. Six hours after incubation with serum-free medium, 250 µL complete medium were added into each well and incubated for an additional 18 h.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
/ß/
isoforms (Fig. 1
). Both PP1
and PP1
associated with endogenous Nek2 protein (Fig. 1A and C). However, Nek2 protein was not coimmunoprecipitated with PP1ß/
(Fig. 1B). In reciprocal experiments, PP1
and PP1
(see Fig. 1A and C), but not PP1ß/
(see Fig. 1B), were coimmunoprecipitated with Nek2. Together, these results show that Nek2 selectively associates with PP1
and PP1
but not with PP1ß/
.
|
is necessary for ionizing radiation inhibition of Nek2 activity in vivo. It is not known if ionizing radiation regulates PP1 bound to Nek2 as a means of controlling the kinase. To determine the effect of ionizing radiation on Nek2 kinase activity, triple HA-tagged wild-type Nek2 and Nek2-AA (a mutant deficient in binding to PP1) were transfected into COS-7 cells. Nek2 was immunoprecipitated from lysates of transfected cells using HA antibody at various times following 10 Gy irradiation. As shown in Fig. 2A
, ionizing radiation inhibited Nek2 activity, measured using myelin basic protein as substrate, with maximal inhibition occurring at 30 to 60 min after ionizing radiation. As a control, the activity of Nek2-AA was not inhibited by ionizing radiation. Note that PP1 coimmunoprecipitated with Nek2, and that the T320 site is dephosphorylated following ionizing radiation as detected with a phospho-specific T320 PP1
antibody. This response of PP1 to ionizing radiation confirms our previous results that ionizing radiation signals activate PP1 by dephosphorylation of T320 (16). As expected, PP1 did not coimmunoprecipitate with Nek2-AA, confirming that the double AA mutation renders Nek2 incapable of binding to PP1. These results show that PP1 binding is necessary for the ionizing radiation inhibition of Nek2 activity and suggests that ionizing radiation activates PP1 to inhibit Nek2 activity by dephosphorylation.
|
was dephosphorylated at T320 following ionizing radiation as detected with antiphospho-T320 of PP1
antibody. As expected, dephosphorylation of PP1
at T320 occurred only in corrected AT cells (YZ5) and not in ATM-deficient AT cells (PEBS). Ionizing radiation inhibition of Nek2 activity was only seen in corrected AT (YZ5) cells, not in ATM-deficient AT cells (PEBS). Thus, ATM is necessary for the ionizing radiationinduced inhibition of Nek2 activity. These results show that Nek2 is a downstream target in the ionizing radiationactivated ATM pathway, and that radiation-induced inhibition of Nek2 activity is likely mediated by PP1
activation due to dephosphorylation at T320.
Ionizing radiation inhibition of centrosome splitting is dependent on Nek2 binding with PP1. Ionizing radiation has been shown to inhibit centrosome splitting (15). To determine whether PP1 is essential for this response, COS-7 cells were transfected with empty vector, or plasmids encoding wild-type Nek2, or the mutant Nek2-AA. Cells expressing these proteins were analyzed by immunofluorescence microscopy at various times after ionizing radiation of 10 Gy. Figure 3A
shows a typical immunofluorescent staining pattern of
-tubulin as a centrosome marker at various time points after irradiation. Ionizing radiation transiently inhibited centrosome splitting at 1 h, and overexpression of wild-type Nek2 enhanced centrosome splitting initially but ionizing radiation produced significant inhibition (Fig. 3B). Moreover, cells expressing Nek2-AA showed enhanced centrosome splitting. Ionizing radiationinduced inhibition of centrosome splitting was both time dependent and reversible, with maximal inhibition occurring at 60 min in controls and at 60 to 120 min in cells overexpressing Nek2. Ionizing radiation failed to decrease centrosome splitting in the Nek2-AA cells (Fig. 3B). These data confirm that ionizing radiation inhibits centrosome splitting and show that the response is dependent on PP1 binding to Nek2.
|
isoform regulates centrosome splitting. To test whether a specific PP1 isoform regulates centrosome splitting in response to DNA damage, HeLa cells were transfected with synthetic siRNA smart pool, designed to selectively knock down the three PP1 isoforms one at a time. Figure 4A
shows that the expression of each PP1 isoform was successfully (
90%) and specifically knocked down in HeLa cells. HeLa cells depleted of PP1
, PP1ß/
, and PP1
or treated with non-target control RNA were irradiated with 10 Gy and centrosome splitting was measured at 0, 1, 2, and 4 h after ionizing radiation. Cells depleted of PP1
, but not of PP1ß/
or PP1
, had higher basal levels of centrosome splitting (see Fig. 4B). This result establishes that only PP1
selectively regulates Nek2 in the absence of ionizing radiation. In response to ionizing radiation, cells depleted of ß/
or
, as well as control cells, show significant inhibition of centrosome splitting (#, P < 0.01). Although in contrast, centrosome splitting was not inhibited by ionizing radiation in cells depleted of PP1
(*, P > 0.05). This result establishes that PP1
regulates centrosome splitting in response to DNA damage.
|
|
, PP1ß/
, or PP1
by specific siRNA or treated with non-target siRNA as negative control. Cells were fixed 5 days after transfection and stained by anti-
-tubulin antibody, and cells with a single centrosome or multiple centrosomes (>2) were analyzed. Depletion of PP1
resulted in a 10-fold increase in cells with multiple centrosomes, whereas depletion of PP1ß/
and PP1
did not result in any measurable increase in the percentage of cells with multiple centrosomes (Fig. 5C). This result establishes that PP1 regulates centrosome number in an isoform-specific manner. | Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The most abundant centrosome associated protein phosphatase is PP1. PP1 exists in three isoforms that are 90% identical with only variation in a few amino acids, mostly near the end of COOH terminus. PP1
, PP1
, and PP1ß/
are products of distinct genes (20, 21). This variation in sequence among isoforms is known to affect the binding specificity of PP1 to its targets. Examples of isoform-specific binding subunits of PP1 include MYPT1 (22, 23), Neurabin (24), and Repo-Man (25). The three PP1 isoforms are differentially distributed in mammalian cells during both interphase and mitosis (12). During mitosis, PP1
predominately localizes to the centrosome, whereas PP1
associates with microtubules of the mitotic spindle. During interphase, PP1
is localized to nuclear matrix and centrosome, whereas PP1
is mainly distributed to nucleoli. One means by which PP1 isoforms may achieve specificity is by binding to different proteins, thereby becoming targeted to different sites within the cell. Moreover, although PP1
is associated with Nek2 and PP1
(26), our data show that only PP1
regulates centrosome number and splitting. Nek2 may now be considered a centrosome targeting subunit for PP1
. Previous results show that ionizing radiation causes dephosphorylation of all isoforms of PP1 (16); thus, it is unlikely that the phosphorylation status of the T320 site influences binding of the other PP1 isoforms (
and
) to Nek2 (27). Based on the different intracellular distribution of PP1 isoforms, it is not surprising that they have distinct functions.
Centrosome splitting is thought to be regulated by phosphorylation of cohesion proteins. This involves tipping the balance between kinase and phosphatase activity. The present study was aimed at exploring the role of PP1 in regulating centrosome splitting and number. PP1 forms a complex with Nek2 and at least one of its substrates C-Nap1. C-Nap1 is thought to interact with Rootlin physically linking the two daughter centrioles (9, 28). Phosphorylation of C-Nap1 results in dissociation of the dimer and therefore gives centrosome splitting. Our results show that PP1
regulates Nek2 function in terms of kinase activity and centrosome number and splitting, both in the presence and absence of radiation-induced DNA damage. The role of ATM in regulating centrosome splitting is not limited to PP1 because ATM also regulates Plk1, which interacts with Nek2 in vivo and phosphorylates Nek2 in vitro. Interestingly, Plk1-mediated changes in Nek2 activity were PP1 independent (14). However, the role of PP1 in regulation of centrosome function is not likely limited to Nek2. PP1 also regulates Aurora-A (29). PP1 binds Aurora-A and Aurora-A binds Inhibitor-2. Inhibitor-2 activates Aurora-A kinase in a bifunctional manner not only through inhibition of PP1 activity but also by allosterically activating Aurora-A. Following radiation-induced dephosphorylation of the inhibitory site at T320, PP1 would be activated to dephosphorylate multiple centrosome substrates, such as Nek2, Aurora-A, Plk1, and C-Nap1, thereby inhibiting centrosome splitting (15).
Our data clearly show that PP1 regulates centrosome splitting and number in an isoform-specific manner. The question of how the ionizing radiation damage signal is transmitted from ATM to PP1 remains unanswered. The simplest explanation is that radiation inhibits the activity of CDKs, which phosphorylate the Thr320 site of PP1. Dephosphorylation of this site occurs by an intramolecular reaction that increases the activity of PP1; thus, decrease in CDK activity removes tonic inhibition leading to increase PP1 activity.
Because PP1 regulates cell cycle progression as well as centrosome number, and because radiation is known to produce cell cycle blocks, the question arises whether observed PP1
effects on centrosome splitting and duplication are secondary to changes in the cell cycle. The fact that centrosome splitting was observed at a dose of 10 Gy and was reversible within 90 min argues strongly that this effect is not secondary to cell cycle arrest because 10 Gy produces a G2 arrest in several hours. The effect of PP1 on centrosome duplication is more complicated. Multiple centrosome phenotypes could be due to a direct effect of PP1
on Nek2 activity. However, an indirect effect of PP1
on cytokinesis could also explain the multiple centrosomes per cell phenotype.
Interestingly, radiation has been shown to lead to increased centrosome numbers in a variety of cell lines derived from human solid tumors (30, 31). However, it is unclear which protein(s) or pathway mediates this phenotype, although overexpression of p21 blocked the radiation-induced increase in centrosome number. Under certain circumstances, the centrosome cycle can be coupled to the cell cycle. For example, depletion of the replication licensing inhibitor geminin has been noted to cause overduplication of centrosome as well as mitotic abnormalities (32). For PP1
to regulate centrosome number indirectly through a cell cycle block would mean require that PP1
depletion produces different cell cycle perturbations than PP1ß and PP1
because the depletion of the later two isoforms did not produce increased number of centrosomes. Other proteins have also been identified as critical for centrosome duplication, including Plk4, Pin1, BRCA1, nucleophosmin/B23, mMPS1/ESK, CP110, etc. (3338) as well as transcription factor E2F and Rb (39).
In summary, Nek2 is a downstream target of PP1
, and our results show this operates both in the presence and absence of DNA damage. Ionizing radiation activates ATM through autophosphorylation (40), and activated ATM inhibits CDKs that phosphorylate PP1 at T320 (16). PP1 is therefore activated after irradiation by reduction in the inhibitory T320 phosphorylation. The mechanism by which activated PP1 inhibits centrosome splitting is unknown, but we propose that PP1
keeps Nek2, Aurora-A, and C-Nap1 dephosphorylated to prevent centrosome splitting. The long-term implications of our findings are 2-fold. First, the link between radiation, Nek2, and PP1 in terms of centrosome splitting raises the possibility that PP1 may play an important role in maintaining genome stability, given the observations that centrosome overduplication has been associated with aneuploidy. Second, the observation that specific isoforms of PP1 have different functions in the damage response opens the possibility of targeting various isoforms or isoform-protein interactions using small-molecule inhibitors as radiation sensitizers.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Received 8/18/06. Revised 10/10/06. Accepted 11/21/06.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
H.-S. Huang and E. Y. C. Lee Protein Phosphatase-1 Inhibitor-3 Is an in Vivo Target of Caspase-3 and Participates in the Apoptotic Response J. Biol. Chem., June 27, 2008; 283(26): 18135 - 18146. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Russo, G. A. Balogh, I. H. Russo, and and the Fox Chase Cancer Center Hospital Network P Full-term Pregnancy Induces a Specific Genomic Signature in the Human Breast Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., January 1, 2008; 17(1): 51 - 66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |