Post-translational Modifications: Reversing ADP-ribosylation
Interactions between serines and molecules of ADP-ribose play an important role in signaling that the DNA in a cell has been damaged and needs to be repaired.
- Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Germany
- Biological Research Center of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungary
Cells rapidly react to stimuli in their environment by making modifications to proteins that change the way those proteins interact with other molecules (Mann and Jensen, 2003). Once a stimulus has stopped, these 'post-translational modifications' are usually reversed and the cell’s life goes back to normal. For example, when a cell suffers damage to its DNA, the addition of a molecule called ADP-ribose – a process that is known as ADP-ribosylation – to certain proteins sends a signal that leads to the damage being repaired; drugs that inhibit the addition of ADP-ribose are also used in cancer therapy (see Li and Yu, 2015 for a review).
It was discovered in the 1960s that specialized enzymes called PARPs can add one or more units of ADP-ribose (ADPr) to specific amino acids within proteins. Over the decades, it became clear that these enzymes are involved in a wide range of cellular processes, including DNA repair, transcription, chromatin regulation and cell death. The first target sites for ADP-ribosylation to be identified were mostly glutamates, aspartates and lysines, and the enzymes responsible for the removal of the ADPr units were also established (Figure 1)(Barkauskaite et al., 2013).
Figure 1
Mono- and poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation and their reversal.
When a protein (top) undergoes mono(ADP-ribosyl)ation the ADP-ribose (red circle) can be added to a glutamate (Glu) or aspartate (Asp; left) or a serine (Ser; right). It is also possible for multiple units of ADP-ribose to be added to a protein at a given target site in a process known as poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation (bottom). The enzymes PARP1 and PARP2 are involved in ADP-ribosylation of both Glu/Asp and Ser, with a protein called HPF1 acting as a cofactor in the mono(ADP-ribosyl)ation of Ser. The enzymes involved in the reversal of both mono- and poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation are shown. Fontana et al. have shown that ARH3 is exclusively responsible for reversing the mono(ADP-ribosyl)ation of Ser, and that it is also involved (with PARG) in reversing the poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation of Ser.
More recently, it was shown that serines can be target sites for ADP-ribosylation, and that many of the proteins that contain such target sites have important roles in DNA damage repair (Bilan et al., 2017; Bonfiglio et al., 2017; Leidecker et al., 2016; Gibbs-Seymour et al., 2016). However, nothing was known about the enzymes or mechanisms responsible for the removal of the ADPr units from the serines. Now, in eLife, Ivan Ahel of the University of Oxford, Ivan Matic of the Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing in Cologne and co-workers – including Pietro Fontana, Juan José Bonfiglio and Luca Palazzo as joint first authors, along with Edward Bartlett – provide new insight into these matters (Fontana et al., 2017).
Using biochemical approaches and a technique called mass spectrometry, Fontana et al. screened a number of proteins that are known to bind to ADPr to find out if they could remove ADPr units that had been added to serines. They discovered that an enzyme called ARH3 could remove ADPr from serine on histone proteins (Figure 1). Previous research has shown that ARH3 and PARG work in similar ways. Both enzymes are able to break the ribose bonds that hold chains of ADPr units together, but ARH3 hydrolyses the chains less efficiently than PARG and also has a different structure (Mueller-Dieckmann et al., 2006; Oka et al., 2006). Fontana et al. discovered that unlike PARG, ARH3 was able to cleave both single ADPr units and chains of ADPr on histones and other proteins.
Since mass spectrometry is a rather expensive and laborious technique, Fontana et al. also used ARH3 in combination with western blotting – a basic technique to detect specific proteins or protein modifications – to track ADP-ribosylation on serines. These experiments confirmed the findings obtained with mass spectrometry, and proved that histone proteins are primarily – if not exclusively – modified on serine. Future studies could build on these findings and use ARH3 as a tool to detect the ADP-ribosylation of serines in proteins.
Despite these new insights, many outstanding questions remain. For example, how does adding ADPr to serine affect the role of a protein? And what happens when two neighboring amino acids experience post-translational modifications? A widely studied post-translational modification that regulates gene expression involves the methylation or acetylation of two lysines (K9 and K27) in histone three (Saksouk et al., 2015). However, these lysines are followed by a serine, which could undergo its own post-translation modification (which could be phosphorylation or ADP-ribosylation). Would these modifications influence each other? Probably, yes. This complex interplay may have far reaching consequences in the regulation of gene expression, and may play an important role in many diseases that depend on ADP-ribosylation pathways.
References
-
The recognition and removal of cellular poly(ADP-ribose) signalsFEBS Journal 280:3491–3507.https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.12358
-
Serine ADP-ribosylation depends on HPF1Molecular Cell 65:932–940.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2017.01.003
-
Serine is a new target residue for endogenous ADP-ribosylation on histonesNature Chemical Biology 12:998–1000.https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.2180
-
Proteomic analysis of post-translational modificationsNature Biotechnology 21:255–261.https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0303-255
-
Identification and characterization of a mammalian 39-kDa poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolaseJournal of Biological Chemistry 281:705–713.https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M510290200
-
Constitutive heterochromatin formation and transcription in mammalsEpigenetics & Chromatin 8:3.https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-8935-8-3
Article and author information
Author details
Giuliana Katharina Moeller
Publication history
- Version of Record published: August 10, 2017 (version 1)
Copyright
© 2017, Moeller et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 1,239
- Page views
-
- 140
- Downloads
-
- 1
- Citations
Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Post-translational Modifications: Reversing ADP-ribosylation
eLife 6:e29942.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.29942
Further reading
-
- Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
- Plant Biology
Metabolism and biological functions of the nitrogen-rich compound guanidine have long been neglected. The discovery of four classes of guanidine-sensing riboswitches and two pathways for guanidine degradation in bacteria hint at widespread sources of unconjugated guanidine in nature. So far, only three enzymes from a narrow range of bacteria and fungi have been shown to produce guanidine, with the ethylene-forming enzyme (EFE) as the most prominent example. Here, we show that a related class of Fe2+- and 2-oxoglutarate-dependent dioxygenases (2-ODD-C23) highly conserved among plants and algae catalyze the hydroxylation of homoarginine at the C6-position. Spontaneous decay of 6-hydroxyhomoarginine yields guanidine and 2-aminoadipate-6-semialdehyde. The latter can be reduced to pipecolate by pyrroline-5-carboxylate reductase but more likely is oxidized to aminoadipate by aldehyde dehydrogenase ALDH7B in vivo. Arabidopsis has three 2-ODD-C23 isoforms, among which Din11 is unusual because it also accepted arginine as substrate, which was not the case for the other 2-ODD-C23 isoforms from Arabidopsis or other plants. In contrast to EFE, none of the three Arabidopsis enzymes produced ethylene. Guanidine contents were typically between 10 and 20 nmol*(g fresh weight)-1 in Arabidopsis but increased to 100 or 300 nmol*(g fresh weight)-1 after homoarginine feeding or treatment with Din11-inducing methyljasmonate, respectively. In 2-ODD-C23 triple mutants, the guanidine content was strongly reduced, whereas it increased in overexpression plants. We discuss the implications of the finding of widespread guanidine-producing enzymes in photosynthetic eukaryotes as a so far underestimated branch of the bio-geochemical nitrogen cycle and propose possible functions of natural guanidine production.
-
- Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
- Medicine
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with higher fracture risk, despite normal or high bone mineral density. We reported that bone formation genes (SOST and RUNX2) and advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) were impaired in T2D. We investigated Wnt signaling regulation and its association with AGEs accumulation and bone strength in T2D from bone tissue of 15 T2D and 21 non-diabetic postmenopausal women undergoing hip arthroplasty. Bone histomorphometry revealed a trend of low mineralized volume in T2D (T2D 0.249% [0.156–0.366]) vs non-diabetic subjects 0.352% [0.269–0.454]; p=0.053, as well as reduced bone strength (T2D 21.60 MPa [13.46–30.10] vs non-diabetic subjects 76.24 MPa [26.81–132.9]; p=0.002). We also showed that gene expression of Wnt agonists LEF-1 (p=0.0136) and WNT10B (p=0.0302) were lower in T2D. Conversely, gene expression of WNT5A (p=0.0232), SOST (p<0.0001), and GSK3B (p=0.0456) were higher, while collagen (COL1A1) was lower in T2D (p=0.0482). AGEs content was associated with SOST and WNT5A (r=0.9231, p<0.0001; r=0.6751, p=0.0322), but inversely correlated with LEF-1 and COL1A1 (r=–0.7500, p=0.0255; r=–0.9762, p=0.0004). SOST was associated with glycemic control and disease duration (r=0.4846, p=0.0043; r=0.7107, p=0.00174), whereas WNT5A and GSK3B were only correlated with glycemic control (r=0.5589, p=0.0037; r=0.4901, p=0.0051). Finally, Young’s modulus was negatively correlated with SOST (r=−0.5675, p=0.0011), AXIN2 (r=−0.5523, p=0.0042), and SFRP5 (r=−0.4442, p=0.0437), while positively correlated with LEF-1 (r=0.4116, p=0.0295) and WNT10B (r=0.6697, p=0.0001). These findings suggest that Wnt signaling and AGEs could be the main determinants of bone fragility in T2D.
