Spa2GFP Is Functional and Localizes Correctly
To investigate the function and dynamics of Spa2p localization, we fused GFP to its carboxyl terminus. For these studies, it was necessary that the expression level of the fusion protein reflect the normal level and be essentially constant throughout a population of cells. Hence we chose to use the endogenous
SPA2 promoter and to integrate all constructs at the
URA3 locus. We first examined the function of this fusion protein by testing its ability to complement the various phenotypes of a Δ
spa2 strain, such as a defect in shmoo formation (
Gehrung and Snyder, 1990;
Chenevert et al., 1994;
Yorihuzi and Ohsumi, 1994;
Valtz and Herskowitz, 1996), a mating defect (
Gehrung and Snyder, 1990;
Chenevert et al., 1994;
Yorihuzi and Ohsumi, 1994;
Dorer et al., 1995), and a random bud site selection pattern in a homozygous Δ
spa2 diploid (
Snyder, 1989;
Zahner et al., 1996). Fig.
A shows the results of a quantitative mating assay in which a Δ
spa2 strain carrying
SPA2,
SPA2GFP, or an empty plasmid is mated with an enfeebled mating partner and diploids are subsequently selected. Deletion of
SPA2 results in ~90-fold decrease in mating efficiency, which is fully complemented by
SPA2GFP. Deletion of
SPA2 results in a defect in shmoo formation (
Gehrung and Snyder, 1990), which has subsequently been shown to be dependent on pheromone concentration and incubation time (
Valtz and Herskowitz, 1996). A Δ
spa2 strain in the presence of saturating pheromone concentrations showed a lower percentage of shmooed cells than wild-type cells. Consistent with previous observations (
Valtz and Herskowitz, 1996), this strain exhibited primarily peanut-shaped shmoos in contrast with the pear-shaped shmoos of the wild-type strain (data not shown).
SPA2GFP fully complements the defect in shmoo formation observed at high pheromone concentration in a Δ
spa2 strain (Table ) and shmoo morphology (data not shown). Deletion of
SPA2 has been shown to have no effect on bud site selection in haploids, yet homozygous diploid deletion mutants are defective in bipolar budding (
Snyder, 1989;
Zahner et al., 1996;
Valtz and Herskowitz, 1996). Haploids (a or α cells) generally bud in an axial pattern, adjacent to the previous division site; however, diploids (a/α cells) bud in a bipolar pattern, distal or proximal to the division site (
Freifelder, 1960;
Hicks et al., 1977;
Sloat et al., 1981). Fig.
B demonstrates that
SPA2GFP is able to completely complement the bud site selection defect in homozygous Δ
spa2 diploids. Furthermore, deletion of
SPA2 results in round cells and
SPA2GFP also complements this morphological defect (data not shown). Together, these assays demonstrate that the Spa2GFP fusion protein is fully functional.
| Table IISPA2GFP Complements Shmoo Formation Defect of Δspa2 Mutant |
Cells containing the Spa2GFP were examined by fluorescence confocal microscopy. All experiments used GFP- (S65T) (
Heim et al., 1995) mutant, which optimized sensitivity and minimized photobleaching. Fig.
C shows the localization of Spa2GFP by confocal microscopy. Consistent with previous indirect immunofluorescence studies, Spa2p localizes to a crescent in unbudded cells, which marks the new bud site, the bud tip of small buds, and the neck between the mother and daughter cell just before cytokinesis (
Snyder, 1989;
Snyder et al., 1991). Similar Spa2GFP localization was observed in a
Δspa2 strain (data not shown), indicating that
SPA2 is not required for the localization of the fusion protein. These results confirm previous immunolocalizations and show that they reflect the distribution of this protein in vivo. We also examined the effect of expression level on Spa2GFP localization to determine if localization was saturable. Expression level was varied by increasing the copy number of
SPA2GFP from a single copy (replacement),
SPA2GFP integrated at
URA3, a centromere plasmid carrying
SPA2GFP, and a multicopy 2-μm plasmid carrying
SPA2GFP. The localization of Spa2p to the bud tip and mother–daughter bud neck was identical under all expression conditions; however, with expression from a multicopy 2-μm plasmid, cytoplasmic Spa2GFP was observed (data not shown). Furthermore, we did not observe a substantial increase in the intensity of the localized Spa2GFP fluorescence during overexpression, suggesting that Spa2p localization is saturable.
Spa2GFP Dynamics: Localization to Two Spatially and Temporally Distinct Structures
To examine the relationship between the two localizations of Spa2GFP (bud tip and mother–daughter bud neck), we investigated the dynamics of Spa2GFP in haploid cells (Fig. A). Initially we examined Spa2GFP in living cells using confocal microscopy, because we observed substantial phototoxicity with conventional fluorescence microscopy, which was incompatible with such time course experiments. Fig. A shows a time course of Spa2GFP dynamics at 22°C in which Spa2GFP within two cells was observed approximately every 5 min at minimally three different focal planes. This experiment involved a total of ~100 confocal scans over ~3 h, and illustrated in Fig. A are the focal planes through the center of the cells. It should be noted that, although two cells are shown in this figure, Spa2GFP is found in a very specific location in the cell, making it difficult to observe such a structure in more than one cell at a time. The upper cell is in focus throughout this time course. During the first hour, Spa2GFP can be seen on the periphery of the bud and appears to spread out during this time. After >1 h, weak fluorescence becomes apparent at the neck between the mother and daughter cell. At 66 and 71 min, Spa2GFP can be seen at the bud periphery and mother–daughter bud neck, suggesting that these two structures can exist simultaneously. In panels (71–83 min), a ring structure is evident which appears as two dots (the cross-section of a ring) at the narrowest point in the neck between the mother and daughter cells. Movement of one focal plane (1 μm) in either direction in the z-axis was consistent with such a ring structure, revealing a solid bar perpendicular to the mother–daughter cell axis. At ~1 h and 30 min, this Spa2p ring appears to have closed, now appearing as a “bar” in all focal planes. Subsequently, the Spa2p “bar” appears to get narrower in the axis perpendicular to the mother–daughter cell and thicker in the mother–daughter cell axis, indicative of cytokinesis. By ~100 min, two Spa2p “bars” are apparent, one in the daughter and one in the mother cell. In the next 40 min (103–145-min panels), Spa2GFP fluorescence becomes concentrated in an intense spot axial to the first bud/birth site marking the next bud site. During this time and up to 160 min, the cells lose their round shape and initiate the next round of polarized growth. From these time courses Spa2p is observed to alternate between localized discrete structures (G1 phase unbudded cells, S phase bud emergence, and M phase during cytokinesis) and more diffuse structures as the daughter cells increase in size. In addition, Spa2p structures appear to change from cup-like crescents to donut-like rings during the cell cycle. Despite the slow apparent movement of these structures, these studies highlight the dynamic nature of Spa2p in living cells.
We also examined the localization and dynamics of Spa2GFP in mating cells. Previous immunofluorescence studies have revealed that Spa2p localizes to shmoo tips (
Gehrung and Snyder, 1990) and Spa2GFP localization in mating cells showed similar localization (Fig.
B). Furthermore, Spa2GFP localized to the tips of mating projections (shmoos) after mating pheromone addition and this localization was also observed in the absence of wild-type
SPA2 (data not shown). Upon zygote formation, Spa2GFP- labeled structures from each haploid appear to fuse into one structure at the site of cell fusion, which subsequently localizes to growing bud tip of the zygote. Fig.
C shows a time course of Spa2GFP localization in haploid cells that have just fused to form a zygote. The ring of Spa2GFP fluorescence at the neck of the a/α zygote persists for ~20 min and then relocalizes to one side of the neck where the new bud will form. Subsequently, Spa2GFP can be seen on the tip of the growing bud. These experiments demonstrate that within a time frame of 10 min the Spa2GFP relocalizes from a ring structure at the site of cell fusion to the site of growth on the new bud.
Spa2GFP Localization in Mutants with Defects in Bud Emergence and Septation
We examined the effect of several cell cycle and bud emergence mutants on Spa2GFP localization to determine if it was possible to separate the two observed Spa2p structures during the cell cycle. Indirect immunofluorescence studies have revealed that Spa2p localizes very early in the cell cycle, marking the site of the incipient bud. Furthermore, neither actin mutants nor tubulin mutants, both of which result in a delocalized cytoskeleton, mislocalize Spa2p (
Snyder et al., 1991). These results suggest that Spa2p localization is independent of the actin and microtubule cytoskeleton. Recently, additional cytoskeletal components termed septins have been shown to be involved in cytokinesis (
Haarer and Pringle, 1987;
Kim et al., 1991;
Ford and Pringle, 1991;
Cooper and Kiehart, 1996;
Field et al., 1996;
Longtine et al., 1996). The septins are encoded by
CDC3,
CDC10,
CDC11, and
CDC12, and these proteins are thought to form 10-nm neck filaments that have been observed by EM at the mother–daughter bud neck (
Byers and Goetsch, 1976). Previous studies have shown that ts mutants in any of the septins result in a loss of localization of all the septins (
Kim et al., 1991;
Ford and Pringle, 1991;
Haarer and Pringle, 1987) and 10-nm neck filaments (
Byers and Goetsch, 1976). The role of the septins, Cdc3p, Cdc10p, and Cdc11p, in Spa2p localization was investigated.
Flescher et al. (1993) have previously demonstrated a genetic interaction between
CDC10 and
SPA2, by showing that
spa2 and an ochre truncation mutant of
CDC10,
cdc10-10, are synthetically lethal. These experiments implicated a connection between
SPA2 and septin formation, although it is unclear whether such an interaction is
CDC10 specific.
SPA2GFP was integrated at the
URA3 locus in the temperature-sensitive septin mutants
cdc3-1,
cdc10-1, and
cdc11-1, and several transformants of each were examined by confocal microscopy after growth in liquid culture for 3 h at 25°C, 3 h at 37°C, and 6 h at 37°C (Fig. ). At the permissive temperature, despite a small percentage of cells displaying the characteristic septin mutant phenotype, misshapen long cell, Spa2GFP localization appeared normal, with bud tip and mother–daughter bud neck fluorescence observable. At the restrictive temperature, the septin mutant phenotype was readily observable in most cells, resulting in the inability of cells to septate and thus an abundance of misshapen long cells with several long extended buds. In
cdc3-1,
cdc10-1, and
cdc11-1 cells at 37°C, Spa2GFP was localized primarily to bud tips. Spa2GFP was not observed at the bud neck between mother and daughter cells (Fig. ), consistent with Spa2p localization in a
cdc10-10 mutant (
Flescher et al., 1993). These results suggest that the septins are either required for Spa2p localization at the mother–daughter neck or, more likely, that these cdc mutants act at a point in the cell cycle before the Spa2p localization at the mother–daughter neck. Perhaps, the mother–daughter neck needs to be sufficiently constricted in order for the Spa2p localization to occur and therefore is not possible in such septin mutants. In contrast, the persistent localization of Spa2GFP to bud tips in the septin mutants at the nonpermissive temperature indicates that septins are not required to maintain Spa2p at this location.
In addition, we examined the localization of Spa2GFP in
bem1 and
bem2 mutants that result in bud emergence defects (
Bender and Pringle, 1991).
BEM1 encodes a protein containing two SH3 domains (
Chenevert et al., 1992) and
BEM2 encodes a rho-GAP for Rho1p (
Peterson et al., 1994;
Kim et al., 1994). Bem1p has been shown to interact with proteins required for bud formation (
Peterson et al., 1994;
Zheng et al., 1995), bud site selection (
Chant et al., 1991), and components of the pheromone-responsive mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade (
Leeuw et al., 1995). In addition,
BEM1 has been shown to be involved in cell mating and polarized growth during shmoo formation (
Chenevert et al., 1992,
1994;
Yorihuzi and Ohsumi, 1994).
Bem2 mutants show genetic interactions with cytoskeletal components (
Wang and Bretscher, 1995).
BEM1 or
BEM2 was deleted from haploid cells by one-step gene replacement (
Rothstein, 1983);
SPA2GFP was integrated at the
URA3 locus; and several transformants of each were examined by confocal microscopy after growth in liquid culture (Fig. ). Both
bem1 and
bem2 mutants show the bud emergence defects and are temperature sensitive as previously described (
Bender and Pringle, 1991); however, Spa2GFP localization appears normal, with bud tip and mother–daughter bud neck fluorescence observable. These results suggest that
BEM1 and
BEM2 are not required for Spa2p localization. Furthermore, specific
bem1 alleles,
bem1-s1 and
bem1-s2, affect cell mating (
Chenevert et al., 1994) and both resultant truncated Bem1ps fail to interact with Ste20p (
Leeuw et al., 1995). Ste20 transduces the signal from a membrane receptor, when it binds pheromone, to the mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade (
Chenevert, 1994). Despite the inability of
bem1-s cells to shmoo, a distinct patch of Spa2GFP was observed on the side of the cells adjacent to their mating partner (data not shown), suggesting that shmoo formation is not necessary for Spa2p localization and
BEM1 acts after Spa2p localization in mating cells.
Delineation and Characterization of a Small Conserved Domain in Spa2p Both Necessary and Sufficient for its Localization and Function
To understand the early localization of Spa2p, we attempted to identify a region that was responsible for its striking localization in vivo. Fig. shows a schematic drawing of Spa2GFP with recognizable secondary structural features indicated. As previously mentioned by
Gehrung and Snyder (1990), the amino terminus of Spa2p contains a region (amino acid residues 286–378) with a very high probability, 0.99, of forming a coiled-coil structure using the Lupas program (
Lupas et al., 1991). In addition, the carboxyl-terminal half of Spa2p contains 25 imperfectly repeated nonameric amino acid repeats between residues 816 and 1,087 (
Gehrung and Snyder, 1990). Analysis of the yeast genome sequence using the BLAST homology search program (
Altschul et al., 1990) revealed a significant homology between the amino-terminal third of Spa2p (the first 536 residues) and an ORF, YSCL8543.8. This homology existed primarily in two regions, the first 120 amino acid residues (32% identity) and amino acid residues 421– 536 of Spa2p (42% identity), with the last 63 residues of this second region displaying even greater identity, 54%. Consequently, we have denoted this second region the “Spa2 box.” Further BLAST searches (
Altschul et al., 1990) using the Spa2 box from Spa2p or YSCL8543.8 did not reveal any other non-yeast proteins with significant homology.
We generated the series of truncation and deletion mutants shown in Fig. to assess the contributions of each of the defined structural domains in Spa2p to its in vivo localization and function. These mutants were made by inserting unique restriction sites that further allowed us to construct double mutants either lacking specific regions (not shown) or consisting only of specific regions fused directly to GFP, such as ΔBX, ΔBV, and ΔCX (Fig. ). Each construct was integrated at the URA3 locus and at least four transformants of each mutant were examined microscopically. Fig. illustrates the summary of the results of mutant localization and function, and Fig. shows representative confocal micrographs of localization and mating function, respectively.
Amino-terminal truncations (ΔA–ΔC) and carboxyl-terminal truncations (ΔZ–ΔX) demonstrate that the amino terminus, the coiled-coil region (residues 286–378), and the nonameric amino acid repeat region (residues 816– 1,087) are not required for Spa2GFP localization in vivo, indicating that the Spa2 box is necessary for correct localization. Strikingly, removal of the last 38 amino acids from ΔX, resulting in ΔW which deletes the carboxyl-terminal 25 amino acids of the Spa2 box, results in a fusion that does not localize (Fig. A), defining the carboxyl-terminal boundary of the Spa2p localization domain to amino acid residues 511–549. Furthermore, Spa2GFP lacking the B–E region (containing the coiled-coil and Spa2 box) or lacking the C–E region (largely the Spa2 box) did not localize (data not shown). To address whether the 152-residue Spa2 box, defined maximally by residues 397–549, was sufficient for localization, we made three constructs consisting of the coiled-coil region and Spa2 box (ΔBX), the coiled-coil region alone (ΔBV), and the Spa2 box alone (ΔCX) fused to GFP. Both constructs containing the Spa2 box, BX and CX, localized correctly, whereas the coiled-coil region alone (BV) did not localize to regions of growth. We were unable to detect expression of any Spa2GFP fusions in yeast by immunoblot analyses (using anti-GFP); however, all of the constructs that did not localize correctly were nonetheless expressed as seen by the substantial cytoplasmic fluorescence (Fig. A). Altogether, these results show that the Spa2 box alone is necessary and sufficient for Spa2p bud tip and mother–daughter neck localization. Similar patterns of localization were observed in the spa2 mutant (pea1, strain JC-J9) isolated by Chenevert et al. (1994) as well as a Δspa2 strain (RAY574), which is deleted for the entire SPA2 coding region, demonstrating that the Spa2 box does not localize to sites of polarized growth via its interactions with Spa2p, i.e., oligomerization. Furthermore, we have not detected any interactions between Spa2p and itself using these various constructs by two-hybrid assays (Orger, M., and R. Arkowitz, unpublished data).
We also analyzed this collection of Spa2GFP truncation and deletion mutants for their function in cell mating. We examined strains carrying these Spa2GFP fusions to determine localization in cells exposed to high pheromone concentration, their ability to complement shmoo formation and morphology defects of a Δ
spa2 mutant, and their ability to complement the mating defect of a Δ
spa2 mutant. Spa2GFP localization in pheromone-treated cells and the ability of various constructs to complement shmoo formation defects were both carried out in a Mata Δ
spa2 strain (RAY578), and
SPA2 mating function was assesed in Mata
spa2 strains (JC-J9) by quantitative mating assays (
Chenevert et al., 1994). All experiments were carried out with integrated copies of truncation or deletion constructs.
Localization and shmoo formation assays were carried out by treating cells with high pheromone concentration (12.9 μM) for 2 h followed by fixation. These pheromone concentrations have been shown by
Dorer et al. (1995) to saturate the pheromone response pathway and shmoo formation. It was further shown that these saturating levels of pheromone resulted in the execution of a default mating pathway. We chose such high concentrations of pheromone both to increase shmoo formation and because
SPA2 has been shown to be required for this default mating pathway (
Dorer et al., 1995). Spa2GFP localization was assessed in Δ
spa2 cells by fluorescence and confocal microscopy. Table shows that all constructs that localized to sites of polarized growth in budding cells localize to the shmoo tip. While none of the Spa2GFP truncations examined fully complemented the shmoo formation defect, ΔC, ΔD, and ΔY partially complemented this defect. These results suggest that a region substantially larger than the Spa2 box is required for Spa2p-mediated shmoo formation during the default mating pathway. Furthermore, the ΔX truncation localizes to the shmoo tip, yet it does not complement the shmoo formation defect, consistent with different requirements for these two processes.
| Table IIIShmoo Formation and Localization of Spa2GFP Deletion Mutants |
The mating assays involved mixing equal amounts of an enfeebled tester strain with spa2 mutant JC-J9 carrying SPA2GFP constructs, allowing them to mate for 4 h at 30°C, and then determining mating efficiency by plating on nonselective and selective media. This functional assay was not affected by SPA2 copy number (data not shown). The results of mating assays are presented in Fig. B and summarized in Fig. . The carboxyl-terminal two-thirds of Spa2p, including the nonameric amino acid repeat domain, is not necessary for mating function. Deletion ΔX, which removes amino acids 655–549, results in a fivefold decrease in mating efficiency, and further truncations drastically reduce mating efficiency to background levels, implicating this region in SPA2 mating function. The amino terminus of Spa2p has a greater role in mating function with a truncation of as little as 88 amino acid residues (ΔA), resulting in a reduction in mating efficiency to background levels, despite ΔA being expressed and localizing correctly (ΔA; Fig. A). Together these results indicate that the Spa2 box also plays a role in mating function being necessary but not sufficient for mating. In addition, the first 90 amino acid residues are essential for mating function. The Spa2p requirements for shmoo formation during the default mating pathway appear to overlap but are not identical to the requirements for cell mating. For example, ΔC is partially functional in the shmoo formation assay, yet it is not functional for cell mating. These differences most likely reflect the roles of SPA2 in the different mating processes: normal mating along a pheromone gradient, and the default mating pathway in high pheromone concentration and the absence of a pheromone gradient. Our results suggest that Spa2p must be correctly localized (via the Spa2 box) for mating function and, in addition, the Spa2p amino terminus is necessary for mating function. Consistent with this interpretation, constructs consisting of the coiled-coil region and Spa2 box (ΔBX) alone or the Spa2 box alone (ΔCX), both of which localize correctly, were not functional in the mating assay. Conversely, Spa2GFP lacking either the B–D region (containing the coiled-coil and Spa2 box) or the C–D region (largely the Spa2 box), neither of which localized correctly, also were nonfunctional in mating (data not shown). The amino terminus of Spa2p, which is essential for mating, and the Spa2 box, which is required for localization, are both conserved in ORF YSCL8543.8 (32% and 42% identity, respectively), suggesting common functions and localizations for these two proteins.
SPH1, a Yeast Gene Containing the Spa2p Localization and Function Domains
Based upon the conserved Spa2p localization and functional domains in YSCL8543.8 (Fig. ), we have named this ORF SPH1 for SPA2 homolog. We isolated SPH1 by PCR from genomic DNA. The sequence of several clones revealed a number of amino acid differences from the yeast genome project sequence (none within the conserved sequences), a frame shift, and a subsequent stop codon, resulting in a 648–amino acid protein (EMBL/GenBank/DDBJ accession No. AF008236). The frameshift in the SPH1 sequence reveals that, in addition to the two regions of homology discussed in the previous section, the carboxyl termini of Spa2p and Sph1p are also homologous with 28% identity in the terminal 84 amino acids of Spa2p (Fig. ). These three regions of homology between Spa2p and Sph1p implicate common functions.
The cloned
SPH1 was used to construct a knockout strain using the one-step method of
Rothstein (1983) in which
SPH1 residues 26–408 were replaced with the
HIS3 gene. Haploid (both a and α strains) and diploid homozygous Δ
sph1 strains were constructed, confirmed by PCR analyses, and examined for growth defects. All Δ
sph1 strains grew normally, did not exhibit ts or cold-sensitive (cs) growth defects, and appeared normal morphologically. Since
SPA2 and
SPH1 are both nonessential genes that display significant homology, we tested whether a double knockout strain displayed any synthetic phenotypes. Haploid Δ
spa2 Δ
sph1 strains were constructed both by sequential one-step deletion methods and also by mating Δ
sph1 haploids with Δ
spa2 haploids, selecting diploids, sporulation, and picking tetrads. Double knockout strains were confirmed by markers and PCR analyses, and in all cases cells grew normally, were not ts or cs, and appeared morphologically similar to Δ
spa2 cells. These results suggest that either
SPA2 or
SPH1 functions are nonessential or that there are other genes with similar functions. Synthetic lethal screens using the double knockout strain should allow us to address the latter possibility.
SPA2 has been shown to be involved in cell mating (
Gehrung and Snyder, 1990;
Chenevert et al., 1994;
Yorihuzi and Ohsumi, 1994;
Dorer et al., 1995) and we therefore examined the role of
SPH1 in this process. The effect of Δ
sph1 alone and in combination with Δ
spa2 on the ability of cells to shmoo and mate was determined. Table shows quantitation of shmoo formation after treatment of cells with saturating concentrations of pheromone. Deletion of
SPA2 results in a defect in shmoo formation (
Gehrung and Snyder, 1990;
Valtz and Herskowitz, 1996). Deletion of
SPH1 resulted in a clear decrease in the percentage of shmoos, approximately halfway between wild-type and Δ
spa2 cells. However, Δ
sph1 shmoos were not peanut-shaped like the Δ
spa2 cells, but rather pear-shaped similar to wild-type cells (data not shown). Cells lacking both
SPA2 and
SPH1 show a shmoo formation defect similar to Δ
spa2 cells, and furthermore their shmoos were peanut-shaped, suggesting that
SPA2 is epistatic to
SPH1. To determine whether expression of
SPH1 or
SPA2 could suppress the shmoo formation defect of Δ
spa2 and Δ
sph1 strains, either
SPA2GFP or
SPH1GFP was expressed using the
SPA2 promoter integrated at the
URA3 locus. Table shows that
SPA2GFP is able to suppress the shmoo formation defect in both Δ
spa2 and Δ
sph1 cells, whereas
SPH1GFP only suppresses the shmoo formation defect in Δ
sph1 cells.
| Table IVShmoo Formation of Δspa2 and Δsph1 Mutants |
| Table VSPA2GFP Complements Shmoo Formation Defect and Bud Site Selection Defect of Δsph1 Mutant |
The role of SPH1 in cell mating was examined by quantitative matings of deletion strains with an enfeebled mating partner. Fig. A shows that Δsph1 either alone or in combination with Δspa2 has no observable effect on mating with an enfeebled mating partner. Furthermore, we examined the effect of Δsph1 on quantitative mating with a wild-type strain and were unable to detect any differences (data not shown). Because of the sequence conservation between Spa2p and Sph1p in two separate regions necessary for Spa2p mating function, we determined if SPH1 could suppress the mating defect in Δspa2 mutants. Fig. B shows that expression of SPH1GFP using the SPA2 promoter integrated at the URA3 locus in a Δspa2 strain resulted in a substantial increase in mating efficiency with an enfeebled mating partner. In addition, overexpression of SPH1 from a multicopy (2 μm) plasmid using the SPH1 promoter also resulted in an increase in mating efficiency with an enfeebled mating partner (data not shown). These results suggest that Sph1p is involved in mating because it results in a defect in shmoo formation and can partially substitute for Spa2p mating function, implying that the sequence conservation between these two proteins is functionally significant.
The effect of
SPH1 deletion on bud site selection was investigated. Deletion of
SPA2 has been shown to have no effect on bud site selection in haploids; however, homozygous diploid deletion mutants are defective in bipolar budding (
Snyder, 1989;
Zahner et al., 1996;
Valtz and Herskowitz, 1996). Specifically,
spa2 mutants are defective in bud site selection after the correct positioning of the first bud. Δ
sph1 haploid cells budded in an axial pattern identical to that of wild-type cells (data not shown). The budding pattern of homozygous diploids was determined by counting cells with two or more bud scars and determining the position of the bud relative to the birth scar (Fig. ,
inset). Fig.
C shows that
SPH1 is required for bipolar bud site selection in diploids similar to
SPA2. Homozygous Δ
sph1 diploids were able to correctly position the first bud, similar to
spa2 mutants. The double homozygous diploid mutant Δ
sph1 Δ
spa2 showed a similar random bud site selection defect. Fig.
D shows representative pictures of Calcofluor staining of bud scars of the individual and double homozygous diploid deletions. It appears that the Δ
sph1 bud site selection defect is less random than that of Δ
spa2; however, further analyses are required. Similar to the ability of
SPA2GFP to suppress the Δ
sph1 shmoo formation defect,
SPA2GFP suppresses the bud site selection defect of homozygous Δ
sph1 diploids. Together these results demonstrate that
SPH1 is required for bipolar budding after the positioning of the first bud and, together with shmoo formation and mating experiments, show that
SPH1 and
SPA2 have overlapping functions.
The conservation of the Spa2 box that is necessary and sufficient for localization to sites of polarized growth in Sph1p and the similar functions of SPH1 and SPA2 prompted us to examine the localization of Sph1p. To determine the localization of Sph1p, we used an SPH1GFP fusion that was driven by the SPA2 promoter, and this construct was integrated at the URA3 locus. Fig. A shows the in vivo localization of Sph1GFP, which is strikingly similar to Spa2p localization. These experiments demonstrate that Sph1p also localizes to sites of polarized growth: at the site where the bud will form, the bud tip, and the mother–daughter bud neck. Similar localization was observed in haploids of the opposite mating type (Mata) and diploids, indicating that Sph1p localization is not cell type specific. Furthermore, Sph1GFP localized to sites of polarized growth in Δsph1, Δspa2, and Δsph1 Δspa2 cells, demonstrating that neither SPH1 nor SPA2 is required for Sph1GFP localization (data not shown). In addition, Sph1GFP localized to shmoo tips in Mata Δsph1 cells that had been treated with saturating concentrations of mating pheromone (Fig. B). Together these results suggest that the Spa2 box in Sph1p is sufficient for localization to polarized growth during both budding and mating.
We also examined whether the localization of Spa2GFP or Sph1GFP could be blocked or competed out by overexpression of either protein. Cross competition of one protein for the other would suggest that these two proteins bind to the same site in vivo. Epitope-tagged Spa2p and Sph1p were overexpressed using a TPI promoter on a 2-μm multicopy plasmid in strains with either integrated SPA2GFP or SPH1GFP (Fig. A). Overexpression of either Spa2p or Sph1p blocks localization of Spa2GFP. Conversely, overexpression of either Sph1p or Spa2p blocks localization of Sph1GFP. Immunoblot analyses demonstrated that both Spa2myc and Sph1myc were expressed (data not shown). Quantitation of the number of cells with localized Spa2GFP or Sph1GFP revealed that overexpressed Spa2myc blocked Spa2GFP or Sph1GFP localization more effectively than overexpressed Sph1myc (Fig. B). Most cells (89%) showed localized Spa2GFP, whereas the number of cells with localized Spa2GFP was reduced twofold in the presence of overexpressed Sph1myc and reduced fourfold in the presence of overexpressed Spa2myc. Conversely, 88% of the cells had localized Sph1GFP that was reduced threefold in the presence of overexpressed Sph1myc and reduced fourfold in the presence of overexpressed Spa2myc. These results are consistent with ability of SPA2GFP to functionally replace Δsph1 in shmoo formation and bipolar bud site selection, whereas SPH1GFP is unable to replace Δspa2 function in shmoo formation and bipolar bud site selection. This cross competition of localization is consistent with the notion that these two proteins may be localized by the same cellular component and this interaction can be competed out by either protein.