PP5 and its homologs in other species represent a subfamily of PPP enzymes distinguished by the presence of an N-terminal domain containing multiple TPR repeats. Ppt1p from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae was the first homolog of mammalian PP5 to be described. Thus far, genetic approaches have not revealed functions for budding yeast Ppt1p. In this report, we have characterized Ppt1p activity in vitro and examined its expression.
In the case of mammalian PP5, results from lipid stimulation and binding, limited proteolysis and truncation studies taken together suggest the TPR domain and the C terminus inhibit PP5 activity in a coordinated manner and that lipid binding to the TPR domain activates the enzyme
in vitro [
18-
20]. In the present study we used assay conditions for Ppt1p identical to those in which PP5 was shown to be activated by removal of the TPR or C-terminal regions [
19]. Under these conditions Ppt1p is also stimulated by lipids toward
32P-MBP, and activating lipids slow TPR domain proteolysis. These results indicate that Ppt1p has a similar domain structure to PP5 and is activated in a similar manner by lipid binding to the TPR domain. Removal of the TPR domain prevents stimulation by lipid, but only modestly increases Ppt1p activity. Carboxyl-terminal truncation modestly increases Ppt1p activity toward both
32P-MBP and
32P-casein, and does not prevent further lipid stimulation of
32P-MBP dephosphorylation. These results distinguish Ppt1p from mammalian PP5 and suggest that the C terminus is less important in controlling Ppt1p activity. Although more work will be required to determine its role in lipid stimulation, removal of the TPR domain had only a small effect on Ppt1p activation. Ppt1p contains two short stretches of amino acids, a 15-residue sequence between the linker helix and the catalytic domain (residues 174–188), and a ten-residue sequence just preceding the extreme C terminus (residues 474–484), that are not found in other PP5 homologs reported thus far ([
1-
10], and accession numbers CAB60937, CAA17690 and AAD21727). The presence of these additional sequences in Ppt1p may underlie the differences in the responses of Ppt1p and PP5 to N or C-terminal truncation. Additional studies will be required to determine if our observations reflect structural and regulatory properties unique to Ppt1p.
Ppt1p and PP5 exhibit similar specific activities toward
32P-casein in the absence of lipid. However Ppt1p activity toward this substrate was not stimulated by lipids. These results highlight the fact that PPP enzymes often exhibit substrate specific effects
in vitro and that the use of a single substrate to study this family of enzymes can be misleading. Like PP5, the control activity of Ppt1p is low toward the commonly used artificial substrates such as
32P-casein and
32P-MBP compared to other PPP enzymes [
18]. Thus, it is not clear whether the selective lipid stimulation of Ppt1p toward
32P-MBP reflects a substrate-directed effect, or whether
32P-casein is simply a poor substrate for Ppt1p. Egloff and colleagues identified seven acidic surface residues on the catalytic face of PP1c γ that are replaced by neutral or basic residues in PP2A [
25]. They suggest the presence of these acidic residues in PP1c γ may explain why casein is a good substrate for PP2A, but not for PP1. Based on a sequence alignment with PP1c γ, these seven acidic residues are not conserved in Ppt1p. Using the program Modeller [
26], a homology model of the catalytic domain of Ppt1p was built based on three PP1 structures – PDB
http://www.pdb.org[
27] codes 1FJM [
28], 1IT6 [
29] and 1JK7 [
30]. This model shows that the catalytic face of Ppt1p is generally less acidic than that of PP1c γ and does not indicate the presence of other acidic residues that could act in the same fashion as those on PP1c γ. Thus the reason for low Ppt1p activity toward this acidic substrate may be more complex than can be explained by electrostatic repulsion.
Others have proposed that fatty acyl coenzyme A esters are potential physiologic regulators of PP5, since these compounds stimulate pNPP hydrolysis by PP5
in vitro at physiologically relevant concentrations and are approximately 10-fold more potent than their free fatty acid counterparts [
21]. Although we confirmed this observation using PP5 and pNPP (data not shown), in our hands similar levels of AA and arachidoyl coenzyme A were required for half-maximal stimulation of
32P-MBP dephosphorylation in the case of both Ppt1p and PP5. Although more work is required to examine this issue thoroughly, our results suggest that the large differences in potency between free fatty acids and fatty acyl coenzyme A esters seen using pNPP may not extend to all protein substrates. In addition, it will be important to determine if lipids in any form play a role in the regulation of PP5 or Ppt1p
in vivo.
Ppt1p was present in both the nucleus and cytoplasm of
S. cerevisiae. No difference in compartmentalization or staining intensity in cells was observed as a function of cell or bud size. This suggests that the level or localization of Ppt1p is not controlled as a function of cell cycle progression. Both nuclear and cytoplasmic localization have been reported for other PP5 homologs. In some cases, including
P. falciparum and HeLa cells, nuclear staining appeared more intense than cytoplasmic staining [
2,
9]. Based on studies with heterologously expressed human PP5-GFP fusion proteins, it has been proposed that nuclear localization requires a stretch of sequence in the C terminus [
31]. However, other sequences or signals are also likely to contribute to nuclear localization of PP5 and its homologs, since rat and mouse PP5, which are identical to human PP5 in this region do not appear to be nuclear in all cell types [
32,
33]. In addition
P. falciparum PP5 is primarily nuclear [
9], although it is not well conserved in the relevant C-terminal region but contains a potential bipartite nuclear localization signal not found in other PP5 sequences reported thus far. The functional significance of differential localization is not known at this time.
Ppt1p levels are highest during periods of rapid growth and drop off when growth slows (Fig. ), raising the possibility that this enzyme may have a role in controlling cell growth [
34] and its expression may be regulated by a metabolic or nutritional signal [
35]. The observation that Ppt1p levels rose and fell in parallel with mRNA levels suggests that Ppt1p expression is primarily controlled at the level of gene transcription. Studies of PP5 and its homologs in cultured cells and various organisms also suggest it may play a role in development [
5,
6] or during rapid cell growth [
2,
7].