Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống
1
/ 16 trang
THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU
Thông tin cơ bản
Định dạng
Số trang
16
Dung lượng
1,9 MB
Nội dung
DNAbindingandpartialnucleoidlocalizationof the
chloroplast stromalenzymeferredoxin:sulfite reductase
Kohsuke Sekine
1,2
, Makoto Fujiwara
2
, Masato Nakayama
3
, Toshifumi Takao
3
, Toshiharu Hase
3
and Naoki Sato
1,2
1 Department of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Science, Saitama University, Japan
2 Department of Life Sciences, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Japan
3 Institute for Protein Research, Osaka University, Japan
The assimilation of sulfur is an important process for
the synthesis of various sulfur compounds such as
amino acids, sulfolipids, and coenzymes. Sulfite reduc-
tase (SiR) is a central enzyme within the sulfur assi-
milation pathway. Sulfate ions taken up by the
sulfate transporter are first activated with ATP by
ATP sulfurylase, forming adenosine-5¢-phosphosulfate.
Adenosine-5¢-phosphosulfate is further phosphoryl-
ated by adenosine-5¢-phosphosulfate kinase, forming
3¢-phosphoadenosine-5¢-phosphosulphate. 3¢-Phosphoa-
denosine-5¢-phosphosulfate is reduced to sulfite by
3¢-phosphoadenosine-5¢-phosphosulfate reductase, and
sulfite is further reduced to sulfide by SiR. The resul-
tant sulfide is fixed into cysteine by cysteine synthase
using O-acetylserine as an acceptor. SiR is localized to
chloroplasts in green leaves and to nongreen plastids
in nonphotosynthetic tissues. SiR has been identified
as one ofthe main constituents of plastid nucleoids in
pea [1] and soybean [2]. ChloroplastDNA was previ-
ously thought to occur dissolved in the stroma, but
recent studies have revealed that the functional form
of chloroplastDNA is a DNA–protein complex called
a nucleoid [3]. Plant SiR contains a siroheme and a
[4Fe-4S] cluster and catalyzes the six-electron reduction
of sulfite to sulfide, depending on ferredoxin as an
electron donor [4]. Plant SiR was considered to be a
Keywords
bifunctional protein; chloroplast nucleoid;
DNA-binding protein; ferredoxin:sulfite
reductase
Correspondence
N. Sato, Department of Life Sciences,
Graduate School of Arts and Sciences,
University of Tokyo, 3-8-1 Komaba,
Meguro-ku, Tokyo 153–8902, Japan
Fax: +81 3 5454699
Tel: +81 3 54546631
E-mail: naokisat@bio.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Note
Nucleotide sequence data for PsSiR are
available in the DDBJ ⁄ EMBL ⁄ GenBank
databases under accession number
AB168112
(Received 1 December 2006, revised 15
February 2007, accepted 19 February 2007)
doi:10.1111/j.1742-4658.2007.05748.x
Sulfite reductase (SiR) is an important enzyme catalyzing the reduction of
sulfite to sulfide during sulfur assimilation in plants. This enzyme is locali-
zed in plastids, including chloroplasts, and uses ferredoxin as an electron
donor. Ferredoxin-dependent SiR has been found in isolated chloroplast
nucleoids, but its localization in vivo or in intact plastids has not been
examined. Here, we report the DNA-binding properties of SiRs from pea
(PsSiR) and maize (ZmSiR) using an enzymatically active holoenzyme with
prosthetic groups. PsSiR binds to both double-stranded and single-stranded
DNA without significant sequence specificity. DNAbinding did not affect
the enzymatic activity of PsSiR, suggesting that ferredoxin and sulfite are
accessible to SiR molecules within the nucleoids. Comparison of PsSiR and
ZmSiR suggests that ZmSiR does indeed have DNA-binding activity, as
was reported previously, but theDNA affinity and DNA-compacting abil-
ity are higher in PsSiR than in ZmSiR. The tight compaction of nucleoids
by PsSiR led to severe repression of transcription activity in pea nucleoids.
Indirect immunofluorescence microscopy showed that the majority of SiR
molecules colocalized with nucleoids in pea chloroplasts, whereas no parti-
cular localization to nucleoids was detected in maize chloroplasts. These
results suggest that SiR plays an essential role in compacting nucleoids in
plastids, but that the extent of association of SiR with nucleoids varies
among plant species.
Abbreviations
PsSiR, pea (Pisum sativum) sulfite reductase; SiR, sulfite reductase; ZmSiR, maize (Zea mays) sulfite reductase.
2054 FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS
stromal protein [5–7], but localization to plastid nucle-
oids provides a new aspect of this enzymeand chloro-
plast molecular biology.
Plastid nucleoids are comprised of various proteins
[3,8–13], andthe protein composition changes during
plastid development. Several plastid nucleoproteins
have been studied. CND41 [14–17] is a bifunctional
protease, considered to be a negative regulator of plas-
tid gene expression. The PEND protein [18–21] is
thought to anchor nucleoids to the envelope membrane
in developing chloroplasts. MFP1 [22,23] binds to the
thylakoid membrane in mature chloroplasts and is
thought to function in a manner similar to PEND in
developing chloroplasts. In a proteomic analysis of
DNA–protein complexes, substantially similar to what
we call nucleoids here, polypeptides derived from var-
ious enzymes were reported in addition to those
involved in transcription, DNA replication, DNA
topology, andDNA binding. These were iron super-
oxide dismutase, putative thioredoxin, pfkB-type car-
bohydrate kinase family protein, and Mur ligase
family protein in Arabidopsis and mustard [24], and
proteins involved in pyruvate dehydrogenase, acetyl-
CoA carboxylase, ATP synthase, ribulose bisphosphate
carboxylase, and Calvin cycle proteins in pea [25]. Dif-
ferent researchers use different criteria to judge if
unexpected proteins are the result of contamination.
Therefore, it is important to confirm either the direct
or indirect DNA-binding properties of these putative
components of nucleoids in vitro.
In previous studies ofthe role of SiR in chloroplast
nucleoids, SiR was suggested to repress DNA synthesis
[26] and transcription [27] within nucleoids. Relaxing
the DNA compaction of nucleoids by release of SiR
activates transcription, whereas increasing DNA com-
paction by the addition of exogenous SiR represses
transcription. These observations led us to propose
that transcription regulation occurs through DNA
compaction by SiR in the plastid nucleoids [27]. The
localization of SiR to nucleoids was confirmed by
immunofluorescence microscopy of isolated pea and
soybean chloroplasts, showing that SiR localizes to
nucleoids within chloroplasts [2].
In our previous studies ofthe role of SiR in DNA
compaction in nucleoids, we used maize SiR (ZmSiR),
the sole recombinant holoenzyme successfully prepared
at that time. Studies of SiR in other plants were forced
to use recombinant, but enzymatically inactive, pro-
teins lacking prosthetic groups. However, we have
been using pea to isolate chloroplast nucleoids because
a large amount ofchloroplastnucleoid is obtained effi-
ciently. Here, we isolated the cDNA of pea SiR
(PsSiR), deduced the structure of PsSiR and prepared
a recombinant holoenzyme of PsSiR. Using the active
recombinant SiR, we examined basic DNA-binding
properties of SiR andthe relationship between SiR
activity and DNA-binding activity. We also examined
differences in the properties of PsSiR and ZmSiR, such
as DNAbindingandlocalization within chloroplasts.
Results
Isolation and molecular characterization
of a cDNA clone encoding pea SiR
The k gt10 pea cDNA library was screened. One posi-
tive plaque was obtained from recombinant phages,
and the insert was cloned to pCR2.1-TOPO. The
insert, designated Seq1, had a length of 2216 bases and
contained a reading frame encoding 663 amino acids,
although the initiation codon was missing. The amino-
terminal sequence of SiR from the pea plastid nuc-
leoid, ‘VSTPAKS’ [1], was found within the deduced
amino acid sequence (Fig. 1). To determine the missing
region, the k gt11 pea cDNA library was screened.
Three clones were obtained. The longest nucleotide
sequence, designated Seq2, contained the other three
inserts. The overlapping regions of Seq1 and Seq2,
which had a length of 275 bases, matched completely.
A putative initiation codon was found in the extended
region. The sequence assembled from Seq1 and Seq2,
designated PsSiR, therefore encodes the precursor of
pea SiR consisting of 685 amino acids. Two candidates
for a poly(A) signal, ATAAA and ATAAT, were
found 12 bases and 55 bases upstream ofthe poly(A)
start site, respectively (data not shown).
The amino acid sequence deduced from PsSiR
exhibited significant homology with SiRs from various
other organisms. The amino acid sequences of SiRs
from angiosperms, a red alga, and two cyanobacteria
were aligned with the hemoprotein subunit (CysI) of
the Escherichia coli SiR complex, which is another type
of SiR using NADPH as an electron donor (Fig. 1).
The similarity ofthe putative mature PsSiR was 91%
to Nicotiana tabacum SiR, 85% to Arabidopsis thaliana
SiR, 79% to Zea mays SiR, 79% to Oryza sativa SiR,
59% to Cyanidioschyzon merolae SiRA, 57% to SiRB,
67% to Anabaena sp. PCC7120 SiR, 66% to Synecho-
cystis sp. PCC6803 SiR, and 48% to E. coli CysI. The
three-dimensional structure of E. coli CysI determined
using X-ray crystallography [28] revealed that the
siroheme andthe [4Fe-4S] cluster are retained within
the active site oftheenzyme through four cysteine lig-
ands, Cys434, Cys440, Cys479, and Cys483, and that
four basic residues, Arg83, Arg153, Lys215, and
Lys217, are involved in the substrate coordination to
K. Sekine et al. DNAbindingof sulfite reductase
FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS 2055
Fig. 1. Comparison ofthe amino acid sequences of different SiRs. The precursor sequence of PsSiR is compared with those predicted from the cDNA of N. tabacum (NtSiR; GenBank acces-
sion number D83583), A. thaliana (GenBank accession number BT000593), Z. mays (ZmSiR; GenBank accession number D50679), O. sativa (OsSiR; GenBank accession number AK103289),
C. merolae SiRA (CmSiRA), SiRB (CmSiRB), Anabaena sp. PCC7120 (AnSiR; CyanoBase accession number alr1348), Synechocystis sp. PCC6803 (CyanoBase accession number slr0963), and
CysI, the hemoprotein of E. coli NADPH-SiR (EcCysI; GenBank accession number M23007). Residues similar to PsSiR are indicated by white letters on a black background. The N-terminal
amino acid sequence ‘VSTPAKS’ is marked by an arrow. The amino acid residues that bind to the substrate are indicated by R and K. The cysteine residues predicted to be ligands for the
[4Fe-4S] cluster andthe siroheme are indicated by C.
DNA bindingof sulfite reductase K. Sekine et al.
2056 FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS
siroheme. These residues are completely conserved in
all SiRs.
To estimate the molecular phylogeny ofthe SiRs, we
constructed phylogenetic trees using the maximum
likelihood method, using treefinder. Essentially sim-
ilar trees were obtained by the neighbor-joining and
maximum parsimony methods. All SiRs of flowering
plants were monophyletic andthe SiRs of plants ori-
ginated from cyanobacterial SiR (Fig. 2). The reliabil-
ity ofthe tree was confirmed by bootstrapping. The
important nodes for the above statement were suppor-
ted with high confidence levels.
Basic characterization ofthe PsSiR gene
cDNA gel blot analysis was carried out with pea
genomic DNA restricted with EcoRI or HindIII. A sin-
gle band was detected in both ofthe digests (Fig. 3D),
suggesting a single PsSiR gene per genome. To exam-
ine the expression level of pea SiR, RNA gel blot
(Fig. 3A,B) and immunoblot (Fig. 3C) analyses were
carried out using leaves, stems, and roots. Comparable
amounts of SiR transcripts and proteins were detected
in the three organs (Fig. 3A,C). The transcript expres-
sion level was not significantly different in light- and
dark-grown leaves (Fig. 3B). These results suggest that
the expression of SiR is constitutive in pea, in agree-
ment with previous studies in tobacco [29], maize [30],
and A. thaliana [31].
The presence of SiR in chloroplast nucleoids was
detected previously using immunological and enzymo-
logical methods. To confirm that the cloned PsSiR was
actually present within thechloroplast nucleoid, the
band corresponding to PsSiR on the SDS ⁄ PAGE of
chloroplast nucleoids from pea leaves was analyzed by
MALDI-TOF ⁄ MS after in-gel digestion with lysyl
endopeptidase or endoproteinase Asp-N (AspN)
(Table S1). In lysyl endopeptidase digestion, 13 peptides
corresponding to the predicted digestion products of
PsSiR were detected. The sequence coverage was 30.3%
of the mature protein. In AspN digestion, six pep-
tides were detected with 13.9% sequence coverage.
Importantly, the AspN digestion gave peptides corres-
ponding to the first 18 residues ofthe N terminus and
the last 16 residues ofthe C terminus ofthe predicted
mature protein. No peptide corresponding to the predic-
ted transit peptide sequence was detected. Because
AspN cleaves peptide bonds at the N-terminal side of
aspartic and glutamic acids under our conditions, the
18-mer peptide beginning with the N-terminal valine
should not have resulted from enzymatic digestion with
AspN. This result clearly indicates that PsSiR exists in
chloroplast nucleoids and that it consists ofthe full-
length mature polypeptide beginning with the valine
residue.
Preparation of recombinant SiR and its
DNA-binding activities
ZmSiR was overproduced in E. coli cells under co-
expression of siroheme synthase and purified by a com-
bination of three successive chromatographies on
ion-exchange, hydrophobic, and ferredoxin-affinity
resin, as described previously [32]. PsSiR was also
produced in a similar way and could be purified by
ferredoxin-affinity chromatography only. The final
Fig. 2. Phylogenetic tree of SiRs based on
amino acids sequences. The tree was con-
structed using the maximum likelihood
method. The three numbers on each branch
show confidence levels for the maximum
likelihood ⁄ neighbor-joining ⁄ maximum parsi-
mony analyses, estimated by bootstrap ana-
lysis with 1000 replicates.
K. Sekine et al. DNAbindingof sulfite reductase
FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS 2057
preparation of PsSiR showed a UV-visible absorption
spectrum characteristic of siroheme-containing proteins
and gave a single major band of around 70 kDa in
SDS ⁄ PAGE (Fig. 4A,B).
This preparation was used to examine the DNA-bind-
ing activity of SiR. A gel-mobility shift assay was car-
ried out using radiolabeled 40-mer or 20-mer synthetic
dsDNA as a probe (Fig. 5A,B). Various amounts of
recombinant PsSiR and 40-mer or 20-mer dsDNA were
mixed, and then the mixtures were electrophoresed. The
intensity ofthe shifted bands (complexes ofDNA and
PsSiR) increased with the amount of PsSiR in both
experiments. The most retarded band was very close to
the origin, indicating that a large complex was formed
(arrowheads in Fig. 5). The band could represent
insoluble materials stuck on the upper edge ofthe gel.
But the materials did enter agarose gels (Fig. 6B,C) and
are not insoluble materials. The apparent dissociation
constants (K
d
) of 40-mer and 20-mer dsDNA were
about 55 nm and 142 nm, respectively, which indicates a
high affinity of PsSiR for long DNA. The recombinant
PsSiR also shifted ssDNA (Fig. 5C).
The sequence specificity of SiR during DNA binding
was examined. Non-labeled poly(dI-dC)Æpoly(dI-dC)
was added to the mixture of labeled 20-mer dsDNA
and PsSiR as a competitor, and then the mixture was
electrophoresed (Fig. 6A). The densities of shifted
band signals at two-, five- and 10-fold excess of com-
petitor were 34, 17 and 12%, respectively, of that with-
out a competitor, indicating comparable affinities of
SiR for the 20-mer dsDNA andthe poly(dI-dC). The
k DNA digested with StyI and pea chloroplast DNA
digested with XbaI were mixed with PsSiR and electro-
phoresed (Fig. 6B). All fragments were shifted and
concentrated in a few slowly migrating bands in the
vicinity ofthe wells. These results suggest that SiR
binds to DNA with low sequence specificity.
Effects ofDNAbinding on sulfite reductase
activity
We measured the sulfite reductase activity of the
recombinant PsSiR by a cysteine synthase-coupled
system using recombinant maize ferredoxin I as an
electron donor for SiR and dithionite as a reductant
for ferredoxin I (Fig. 7). The Michaelis constant (K
m
)
of PsSiR for maize ferredoxin I was about 18 lm,
300 400 500 600
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.5
0.1
0
Absorbance
nm
175
47.5
62
83
KDa
12
AB
Fig. 4. (A) UV-visible absorption spectrum and (B) SDS ⁄ PAGE ana-
lysis of purified recombinant PsSiR. (A) Absorption maxima at 389
and 580 nm (arrows) indicate the presence of a siroheme-contain-
ing prosthetic group. (B) A single band (arrowhead) was observed
by staining with Coomassie brilliant blue.
Leaves
Stems
Roots
PsSiR
28S rRNA
PsTUB1
Light
Dark
PsSiR
AB
Leaves
Stems
Roots
α-PsSiR
12
5
2
kbp
HindIII
EcoRI
C
D
95 kDa
Fig. 3. Basic characterization of PsSiR. RNA blot analyses of the
expression of PsSiR in (A) various organs of pea plants and (B) pea
leaves grown in light or dark. Total RNA (10 lg) prepared from
green leaves, stems, or roots, and polyA + RNAs (3 lg) prepared
from leaves grown in light or dark were electrophoresed on 1.2%
agarose gel. The blots were probed with a DIG-labeled DNA frag-
ment corresponding to the second exon of PsSiR. Lower panels
indicate the staining of (A) 28S rRNA and (B) blotted mRNA of pea
b-tubulin 1 as controls. (C) Immunoblot analysis ofthe distribution
of PsSiR in various organs. Total extracts of 5 mg fresh weight of
green leaves, stems, or roots in NaCl ⁄ P
i
were separated on 10%
gel by SDS ⁄ PAGE. The blots were probed with antibodies raised
against PsSiR. As a loading control, the staining pattern of a 95-kDa
major band (putative heat shock protein) is shown below. (D) DNA
blot analysis ofthe pea genome. Genomic DNAof pea was diges-
ted with EcoRI and HindIII and separated on 0.8% agarose gel. The
blots were probed with the same probe used for RNA blotting.
DNA bindingof sulfite reductase K. Sekine et al.
2058 FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS
higher than that of ZmSiR [33], which is about 4 lm.
Unlike PsSiR, the activity of ZmSiR was assayed by
measuring the increase in NADP
+
oxidized by reduc-
tion of ferredoxin III donating electrons to SiR as des-
cribed by Yonekura-Sakakibara et al. [30]. The
difference in K
m
may be due to the differences in the
methods used to measure activity.
To examine the effects ofDNAbinding on sulfite
reductase activity, recombinant PsSiR was mixed with
DNA to form a DNA–SiR complex, and then enzy-
matic activity was measured (Fig. 7). There was no sig-
nificant difference in activity of DNA-bound and
DNA-free PsSiR. This indicates that sulfite reductase
remains functional when it is bound to DNA. Binding
of PsSiR to DNA in the reaction mixture during the
measurement of activity was confirmed by an experi-
ment of coprecipitation of SiR with DNA-cellulose in
the reaction medium (data not shown).
Characteristics of pea SiR with respect to maize
SiR
We previously used recombinant ZmSiR in studies of
the DNAbindingof sulfite reductase [1,27]. Here, we
compared the DNA-binding activity of ZmSiR and
PsSiR (Fig. 5, right). An increase in the intensity of
the shifted bands was found as the concentration
of ZmSiR increased with 40-mer ds-, 20-mer ds- or
40-mer ssDNA. However, the apparent K
d
values of
ZmSiR were higher than those of PsSiR, suggesting
that thebindingof ZmSiR to DNA is weaker than
that of PsSiR. It should be noted that very slowly
migrating bands, as detected with PsSiR, were scarcely
detected with ZmSiR. This result suggests that ZmSiR
has a lower ability to compact DNA than PsSiR. An
additional rapidly migrating band was detected with
ssDNA and PsSiR (asterisk in Fig. 5C).
Differences in the ability to compact DNA were also
examined for PsSiR and ZmSiR. Changes over time
were examined by fluorescence microscopy after mix-
ing DNA with PsSiR or ZmSiR. Immediately after
mixing, a number of blurred particles were formed
upon addition of PsSiR, whereas either ZmSiR or
98765432110
FD
K
d
≅
55 nM K
d
≅
165 nM
A
PsSiR ZmSiR
K
d
≅
142 nM K
d
≅
294 nM
FD
B
PsSiR ZmSiR
98765432110
FD
K
d
≅
115 nM K
d
≅
266 nM
C
PsSiR ZmSiR
98765432110
Fig. 5. DNAbinding activity of SiRs. The
32
P-labeled (A) 40-mer
dsDNA, (B) 20-mer dsDNA, and (C) 40-mer ssDNA were incubated
without (lanes 1 and 10) or with 25, 50, 100, and 200 n
M PsSiR
(lanes 2–5) or ZmSiR (lanes 6–9) before electrophoresis in 6% poly-
acrylamide gel. FD indicates free DNA. The bands very close to
wells, which suggest large complexes, are indicated by arrow-
heads. The slightly shifted bands detected in ssDNA with PsSiR
are indicated by an asterisk. The apparent dissociation constants
(K
d
) are shown below the lane numbers.
K. Sekine et al. DNAbindingof sulfite reductase
FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS 2059
buffer alone did not engender such particles (Fig. 8).
After incubation for >2 h, bright and structurally
well-defined particles were formed with PsSiR. Some
particles increased in brightness over time, indicating
that the quantity ofDNA per particle increased
and ⁄ or DNA became more tightly compacted. After
incubation for more than 6 h, blurred particles similar
to those at 0 h in PsSiR were formed in ZmSiR. These
results suggest that the DNA-compacting activity of
ZmSiR is weaker than that of PsSiR.
We previously performed an in vitro transcription
assay using isolated chloroplast nucleoids and showed
that UTP incorporation into RNA was repressed by
the addition of recombinant ZmSiR [27]. We expected
that PsSiR is more active in repressing the transcrip-
tional activity ofchloroplast nucleoids. Isolated pea
chloroplast nucleoids were mixed with various con-
centrations of recombinant PsSiR or ZmSiR and
incubated for 30 min on ice before the addition of
radiolabeled UTP to initiate run-on transcription
(Fig. 9, closed and open circles, respectively). The
incorporation of radioactive UTP into the high
molecular weight fraction was used as a measure of
transcriptional activity. In Fig. 9, the activity is
expressed in percentage ofthe control activity in the
presence of 100 lgÆmL
)1
heparin. In a previous paper
[27], we showed that addition of heparin releases the
endogenous SiR from nucleoids, andthe full transcrip-
tional activity is obtained. When ZmSiR was used,
transcriptional activity gradually decreased as ZmSiR
concentration increased. The activity decreased by
about one-half at a ZmSiR concentration of 1.6 lm
(not shown). This result is consistent with the results
of our previous experiment [27]. When PsSiR was
added at a concentration of 0.2 lm, the transcriptional
activity ofthe nucleoids was reduced dramatically to
about 20% of that in the absence of exogenous SiR.
Therefore, PsSiR more strongly repressed transcription
than did ZmSiR. This is consistent with the higher
affinity of PsSiR for DNA.
0
100
200
300
400
0 5 10 15 20
Ferredoxin (µ
M)
Cys (mol/min/mol SiR)
Fig. 7. Measurement of enzymatic activity of DNA-bound PsSiR.
PsSiR was incubated without (open circles with solid thin line) or
with 10 lgÆmL
)1
(filled squares with bold solid line) or 20 lgÆmL
)1
(filled triangles with dashed line) HindIII digested k DNA before
measurement. Various concentrations of recombinant maize ferre-
doxin I were added as an electron donor to SiR. The amount of cys-
teine produced per minute per mole of SiR was used as a measure
of enzymatic activity.
54321
poly(dI-dC)
A
2x 5x 10x
987654321
10 11 141312
B
PsSiR
ZmSiR
PsSiR
ZmSiR
Fig. 6. Sequence specificity for DNA-binding by SiRs. (A) Competition for DNA-SiR complex formation with poly(dI-dC)Æpoly(dI-dC). The
32
P-labeled 20-mer dsDNA and none, two-, five-, or 10-fold mass excess of nonlabeled poly(dI-dC)poly(dI-dC) (lanes 2–5, respectively) were
mixed with 100 n
M PsSiR prior to electrophoresis in 6% polyacrylamide gel. The bands shifted by PsSiR and faded by the competitor are
indicated by arrowheads. Lane 1 is DNA alone. (B) Bindingof SiR to StyI-digested k phase DNA (lanes 1–7) and XbaI-digested chloroplast
DNA (lanes 8–14). Each digested DNA was incubated without (lanes 1 and 8) or with 200, 400, and 800 n
M PsSiR (lanes 2–4 and 9–11) or
ZmSiR (lanes 5–7 and 12–14) prior to electrophoresis in 1% agarose gel.
DNA bindingof sulfite reductase K. Sekine et al.
2060 FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS
Figure 9 also shows comparison of nucleoids from
mature (14-day-old) and developing (6-day-old) leaves.
As previously reported [10,18], the leaves of 6-day-old
seedlings are small buds that are pale green and are
not yet open. The developing chloroplasts in such
leaves contain a higher amount ofchloroplast DNA,
but are not active in photosynthesis. The results in
Fig. 9 show that the nucleoids from developing leaves
(closed square at zero SiR concentration) are less act-
ive in transcription than those from mature leaves
(closed circle) due to stronger repression by endo-
genous SiR. This is consistent with the previous results
of immunoblot [10]. The effects of exogenous SiR,
either from pea or maize, were similar in both mature
and developing nucleoids.
Intrachloroplast localizationof SiR
To examine the intrachloroplast location of SiR, indi-
rect immunofluorescence microscopy of isolated chloro-
plasts was performed (Fig. 10). Isolated pea or maize
chloroplasts fixed in paraformaldehyde were incubated
with an antibody raised against PsSiR and then with
an AlexaFluor-tagged secondary antibody. The chloro-
plasts were also counterstained with 4¢,6-diamidino-2-
phenylindole to visualize chloroplast DNA. In pea
chloroplasts, the AlexaFluor signal was detected non-
uniformly within the chloroplast. The spots that were
densely stained with AlexaFluor coincided with the
areas of 4¢,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole staining. These
results indicate that PsSiR exists within nucleoids, as
well as in the stroma. In maize chloroplasts, the Alexa-
Fluor signal was located uniformly throughout the
whole chloroplastand no dense AlexaFluor signal was
colocalized with a 4¢,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole signal.
This indicates that ZmSiR is not particularly concen-
trated in nucleoids.
Discussion
Comparative aspects of SiR
The sequence alignment (Fig. 1) indicates that PsSiR
has the archetypal molecular structural characteristics
0
1
6
2
20
PsSiR ZmSiR
h
co 0 h co 20 h
A
F
EJ
D
I
C
H
B
G
K
L
Fig. 8. Compaction ofchloroplastDNA by SiRs. Isolated pea chloro-
plast DNA was incubated with recombinant PsSiR (A, B, C, D, E)
or ZmSiR (F, G, H, I, J) on ice. The mixture was stained with 4¢,6-di-
amidino-2-phenylindole and examined by fluorescence microscopy
immediately (A, F) or at 1 h (B, G), 2 h (C, H), 6 h (D, I), or 20 h (E, J)
after mixing. ChloroplastDNA incubated in buffer alone was also
examined immediately (K) or at 20 h (L) after mixing as a control.
K. Sekine et al. DNAbindingof sulfite reductase
FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS 2061
of plant ferredoxin-dependent SiRs, i.e. four cysteines
as ligands for the prosthetic groups and two lysines and
two arginines involved in the substrate coordination to
siroheme are completely conserved. Region A in Fig. 1
indicates the common insertion in ferredoxin-dependent
SiRs and ferredoxin-dependent nitrite reductases, with
respect to E. coli CysI, and is reported as a candidate
for an interaction site with ferredoxin [29]. PsSiR reta-
ins this insertion from Ala234 to Phe261 with high
homology, as expected. However, region A sequences
in C. merolae SiRA and SiRB are poorly conserved,
)%( ytivitca lanoitpircsnarT
SiR (µ
M
)
40
20
0
0.40.20
A
less active active
developing
mature
B
SiR
DNA
Fig. 9. Effects of SiRs on the transcriptional activity of nucleoids
from mature and developing chloroplasts. (A) The isolated pea
chloroplast nucleoids were incubated with various concentrations
of PsSiR (solid line) or ZmSiR (dashed line) on ice for 30 min and
then added to the reaction mixture. After preincubation at 25 °C for
30 min,
3
H-labeled UTP was added to start the reaction and the
mixture was incubated at 25 °C for 30 min. The count rate (cpm) of
radioactive UTP incorporated into the high-molecular weight fraction
was measured. The transcriptional activity is expressed as a per-
centage ofthe activity in the presence of 100 lgÆmL
)1
heparin,
which releases all endogenous SiR and makes the nucleoids fully
active in transcription. We used such measure because the amount
of cpDNA, as estimated by Southern blotting with rbcL as a probe,
may not be very accurate for comparing different samples. The act-
ual UTP incorporation in the nucleoids from mature and developing
chloroplasts was 601 ± 83 and 824 ± 113 cpm Æ ng
)1
cpDNA,
respectively. s,d, nucleoids from mature pea chloroplasts (14-day-
old leaves); h,j, nucleoids from developing pea chloroplasts (6-
day-old leaf buds).s,h, addition of maize SiR; d,j, addition of pea
SiR. (B) A schematic view on the compaction status of nucleoids in
developing and mature chloroplasts. In developing chloroplasts, a
large amount of SiR is bound to the nucleoids and represses the
transcription severely. In mature chloroplasts, the amount of SiR is
reduced andthe nucleoids are more active in transcription.
DAPI
AlexaFluor
maize pea
A
B
C
D
EF
GH
Fig. 10. Intrachloroplast localizationof SiR. Isolated pea (A, B, C, D)
or maize (E, F, G, H) chloroplasts were fixed with paraformalde-
hyde, probed with antibodies raised against PsSiR (A, B, E, F) or
preimmunized serum (C, D, G, H) and AlexaFluor488-tagged secon-
dary antibodies, and stained with 4¢,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole.
Left-hand panels (A, C, E, G) display 4¢,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole
and chlorophyll fluorescence. Right-hand panels (B, D, F, H) display
AlexaFluor488 fluorescence. The bar indicates 10 lm.
DNA bindingof sulfite reductase K. Sekine et al.
2062 FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS
with an additional insertion: YWK(R ⁄ K)(D ⁄ E)(I ⁄ L). It
will be interesting to determine whether SiRA and
SiRB have affinity for ferredoxin.
The phylogenetic tree (Fig. 2) indicates that the SiRs
of cyanobacteria and plants (using ferredoxin as an
electron donor) originate from bacterial SiRs (using
NADPH as an electron donor via the flavin subunit).
The plant SiRs originate from cyanobacterial SiRs,
with Gloeobacter as the root. However, cyanobacterial
SiRs are divided into two clades, one consisting of
Synechococcus and Prochlorococcus, andthe other
consisting of Anabaena–Nostoc, Synechocystis, and
Thermosynechococcus. These two clades correspond to
the two major lineages of cyanobacteria [34]. Phylo-
genetic analysis with plastid-encoded protein genes
suggested that plastids originate from the Anabaena–
Synechocystis clade. However, plant SiRs are asso-
ciated with the Synechococcus–Prochlorococcus clade,
although the confidence level ofthe branches near
Synechococcus sp. PCC 6301 is low (Fig. 2). The
angiosperm SiRs form a monophyletic cluster distinct
from the SiRs of cyanobacteria or C. merolae. The
C. merolae SiRs and Thalassiosira (diatom) SiR are
monophyletic, which suggests that the SiR gene was
transferred from a red algal endosymbiont during sec-
ondary endosymbiosis. In C. merolae, an ORF (CMR
440 C) homologous to the a-component (flavoprotein)
of NADPH-dependent SiR is also found [35]. One of
the SiRs in C. merolae (possibly SiRB) could function
with this flavoprotein, rather than ferredoxin.
The genomic DNA blot analysis (Fig. 3D) suggests
that there is a single SiR gene in the haploid pea
genome. A single SiR gene is also found in A. thaliana
[36], rice [37], and N. tabacum [29]. Another copy must
be present in tobacco because it is an amphidiploid.
Except in tobacco, the SiR gene occurs as a single-
copy gene in all known flowering plants. SiR was
known as a stromalenzyme before it was found locali-
zed to plastid nucleoids [1,2]. Thenucleoid localization
of SiR could have been explained by an isozyme enco-
ded by a different gene, but the copy number analysis
indicates that this is not likely.
Reductase activity andDNA binding
Here, the large-scale production of enzymatically act-
ive recombinant SiR containing prosthetic groups
enabled detailed experiments on the relationship
between enzymatic activity and DNA-binding activity.
The DNA gel-mobility shift assay using recombinant
SiR revealed that SiR is an authentic DNA-binding
protein, with high DNA-binding affinity. Our data
demonstrate that SiR directly binds to dsDNA, as well
as to ssDNA (Fig. 5). This suggests that SiR binds to
DNA during replication, which may cause the repres-
sion ofDNA synthesis by SiR in isolated nucleoids
[26]. Radiolabeled DNAand poly(dI-dC)Æpoly(dI-dC)
competed comparably for binding to SiR, and all the
restriction fragments of both k andchloroplast DNA
were shifted by SiR binding (Fig. 6). This shows that
SiR binds to DNA without notable sequence specificity
and supports our argument that SiR is a global regula-
tor ofnucleoid functions such as transcription [27] and
replication [26].
Intrachloroplast localization
Indirect immunofluorescence microscopy of isolated
chloroplasts demonstrated the presence of PsSiR in the
nucleoids of pea chloroplasts. Our data are basically
consistent with previous results [2]. In the previous
study, however, the fluorescence signal of SiR clearly
coincides with DNA in pea chloroplast nucleoids, and
essentially no fluorescence was detected in the stroma
[2]. We found an SiR signal throughout the whole
chloroplast and in dense patches that coincided with
the nucleoids. Chi-Ham et al. [2] fixed chloroplasts in
a buffer containing formaldehyde and then dehydrated
them with ethanol and acetone on slides, whereas we
used formaldehyde fixation without dehydration and
performed immunoreaction and 4¢,6-diamidino-2-phen-
ylindole staining in a test tube. We suspect that the
stromal components were washed away during the
washing and dehydration process in the experiments of
Chi-Ham et al. [2]. The mild processing in our experi-
ments made thelocalizationof SiR slightly obscure,
but this indicates that SiR is not confined to the nucle-
oids and is also present in the stroma.
Comparison of PsSiR and ZmSiR
In the gel-mobility shift assay of PsSiR, shifted bands
that remained very close to the origin were detected.
These bands represent potentially large DNA–SiR
complexes formed by the intermolecular aggregation of
DNA fragments. The large complexes are only found
with PsSiR, indicating high DNA-compacting ability.
In contrast, ZmSiR formed no such complex, indica-
ting that the DNA-compacting ability of ZmSiR is
inferior to that of PsSiR.
The difference in DNA-compacting ability between
PsSiR and ZmSiR was clearly demonstrated by the
in vitro compaction assay (Fig. 8). Previously, we
showed that nucleoid-like particles were formed only
several hours after the mixing of recombinant ZmSiR
and pea chloroplastDNA [1]. Our current results repro-
K. Sekine et al. DNAbindingof sulfite reductase
FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS 2063
[...]... sensor ofthe redox state ofthechloroplast because the expression of some chloroplast genes is regulated by thechloroplast redox state [38,39] It is intriguing that FrxB, a subunit of NAD(P)H dehydrogenase containing a [4Fe-4S] cluster, was isolated as a plastid DNA- binding protein [40] This provides a reasonable hypothesis for the redox control ofthe functional and ⁄ or morphological state of chloroplast. .. rate of about 50 lmolÆm)2Æs)1 FEBS Journal 274 (2007) 2054–2069 ª 2007 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2007 FEBS K Sekine et al DNAbindingof sulfite reductase Preparation of chloroplasts and nucleoids DNAand RNA blot hybridization Pea chloroplasts were prepared from the leaf buds of epicotyls of 6- or 7-day-old seedlings or the mature leaves of 14-day-old plants as described previously [10] Maize chloroplasts... tightly packages mitochondrial DNAand changes the structure of nucleoids into a metabolically favorable conformation and protects DNA in the remodeled conformation In chloroplasts, various reactive oxygen species are produced during photosynthesis [50,51] We hypothesize that theDNAbindingof SiR might be dependent on the metabolic state, e.g photosynthesis, to optimize nucleoid conformation for metabolic... ofthe DNA- binding study, the tighter compaction ofDNA induced by PsSiR was a result of its stronger binding to DNAThe results of immunofluorescence microscopy need additional explanation In the isolated maize chloroplasts, SiR was detected throughout the whole chloroplastandthe distribution was almost uniform This result was different from that in pea chloroplasts In developing soybean chloroplasts... Arabidopsis chloroplasts in the same way, did not contain a detectable amount of SiR (unpublished results) This could be due to treatment with a high concentration of detergent during nucleoid preparation These different results in different plants can be explained by differences in the affinity of SiRs to DNA Relationship between DNAbindingand enzymatic activity of SiR What is the role of SiR within the nucleoids?... strand A 20-mer dsDNA probe was similarly prepared by annealing 5¢-AGTCTAGACTGCAGTTGA GT-3¢ and its complementary strand The oligonucleotide described above for 40-mer dsDNA was also used as a single-stranded DNA probe These probes were 5¢-end labeled The labeled DNA probes were incubated with recombinant SiR in binding buffer (4 mm Tris ⁄ HCl, pH 8.0, 5% glycerol) on ice for 30 min, and then the binding. .. to form DNA SiR complexes before thereductase activity measurement The SiR alone or DNA SiR complex was added to the SiR assay mixture to a final concentration of 0.5 lm SiR In vitro compaction ofDNA Pea chloroplastDNA was prepared as described previously [18] ChloroplastDNA (2 lg) was mixed with PsSiR or ZmSiR (35 pmol) in 50 lL of 50 mm Tris ⁄ HCl, pH 7.5, and incubated at 4 °C Aliquots of 4 lL... NS from the Japanese Society of for the Promotion of Science, and by the Cooperative Research Program of Institute for Protein Research, Osaka University (2003–06) 14 15 16 References 1 Sato N, Nakayama M & Hase T (2001) The 70-kDa major DNA- compacting protein ofthechloroplastnucleoid is sulfite reductase FEBS Lett 487, 347– 350 2 Chi-Ham CL, Keaton MA, Cannon GC & Heinhorst S (2002) The DNA- compacting... plastid nucleoids EMBO J 12, 555–561 Sato N, Ohshima K, Watanabe A, Ohta N, Nishiyama Y, Joyard J & Douce R (1998) Molecular characterization ofthe PEND protein, a novel bZIP protein present in the envelope membrane that is the site ofnucleoid replication in developing plastids Plant Cell 10, 859–872 Sato N & Ohta N (2001) DNA- binding specificity and dimerization ofthe DNA- binding domain ofthe PEND... Nakayama M, Teshima K, Akutsu H & Hase T (2006) NMR study ofthe electron transfer complex of plant ferredoxin and sulfite reductase: mapping the interaction sites of ferredoxin J Biol Chem 281, 10482–10488 34 Sato N (2006) Origin and evolution of plastids: genomic view on the unification and diversity of plastids In The Structure and Function of Plastids) (Wise RR & Hoober JK, eds), pp 75–102 Springer, . studies of the role of SiR in chloroplast nucleoids, SiR was suggested to repress DNA synthesis [26] and transcription [27] within nucleoids. Relaxing the DNA compaction of nucleoids by release of. of recombinant PsSiR and 40-mer or 20-mer dsDNA were mixed, and then the mixtures were electrophoresed. The intensity of the shifted bands (complexes of DNA and PsSiR) increased with the amount of PsSiR. DNA binding and partial nucleoid localization of the chloroplast stromal enzyme ferredoxin:sulfite reductase Kohsuke Sekine 1,2 , Makoto Fujiwara 2 ,