1. Trang chủ
  2. » Luận Văn - Báo Cáo

Báo cáo khoa học: Peroxisomes as dynamic organelles: peroxisome abundance in yeast docx

10 291 0
Tài liệu đã được kiểm tra trùng lặp

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 10
Dung lượng 317,48 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

Conceptually, peroxisome abundance is a result of the rate of development fission, de novo synthesis rel-ative to the rate of autophagic degradation and reduction via the segregation of o

Trang 1

Peroxisomes as dynamic organelles: peroxisome

abundance in yeast

Ruchi Saraya, Marten Veenhuis and Ida J van der Klei

Molecular Cell Biology, Groningen Biomolecular Sciences and Biotechnology Institute (GBB), University of Groningen, Kluyver Centre for Genomics of Industrial Fermentation, Haren, The Netherlands

Introduction

Eukaryotic cells are characterized by the presence of

specific compartments, the organelles The advantages

of compartmentalization may include the creation of

unique microenvironments with specific (bio)chemical

properties to improve the efficiency of certain

pro-cesses or to provide additional pathways for

regula-tion To form and maintain these compartments,

highly complex mechanisms exist in eukaryotic cells

Peroxisomes represent an important class of

organ-elles that are present in almost all eukaryotes [1] Their

function and significance varies with the organism in

which they occur, their developmental stage and

envi-ronmental conditions They are generally involved in

the metabolism of reactive compounds, such as

hydro-gen peroxide or glyoxylate [1]

In yeast, peroxisomes are predominantly involved

in the metabolism of various unusual carbon and

nitrogen sources, such as oleic acid, methanol, d-amino acids and purines [2] Upon transfer of glucose-grown yeast cells to media containing these com-pounds, the number and size of peroxisomes shows a strong increase

The biogenesis of peroxisomes depends on the func-tions of unique genes (termed PEX genes) At present, over 30 PEX genes have been identified, most of which are involved in the process of matrix protein import [3] Two PEX genes (PEX3 and PEX19) have been impli-cated in the targeting and insertion of peroxisomal membrane proteins The remaining PEX genes are involved in regulating organelle size and numbers [4] Conceptually, peroxisome abundance is a result of the rate of development (fission, de novo synthesis) rel-ative to the rate of (autophagic) degradation and reduction via the segregation of organelles to daughter

Keywords

de novo synthesis; fission; organelle

inheritance; peroxisomes; yeast

Correspondence

I J van der Klei, Molecular Cell Biology,

Groningen Biomolecular Sciences and

Biotechnology Institute (GBB), PO Box 14,

NL-9750 AA Haren, The Netherlands

Fax: +31 (0)50 363 8280

Tel: +31 (0)50 363 2179

E-mail: I.J.van.der.klei@rug.nl

(Received 2 March 2010, revised 23 April

2010, accepted 17 May 2010)

doi:10.1111/j.1742-4658.2010.07740.x

Peroxisomes are cell organelles that are present in almost all eukaryotic cells and involved in a large range of metabolic pathways The organelles are highly dynamic in nature: their number and enzyme content is highly variable and continuously adapts to prevailing environmental conditions This review summarizes recent relevant developments in research on pro-cesses that are involved in the regulation of peroxisome abundance and maintenance These processes include fission of the organelles, formation of new peroxisomes from the endoplasmic reticulum, autophagic degradation and segregation⁄ inheritance during cell division

Abbreviations

DRP, dynamin-related protein; PEX, peroxisome gene.

Trang 2

cells during cell division (Fig 1) The extent to which

these processes control peroxisome numbers in a

spe-cific cell is still largely unknown In this review we

summarize the current knowledge of the various

pro-cesses regulating peroxisome abundance in yeast

Modes of peroxisome formation

For decades, the classical view on peroxisome

prolifer-ation was that the organelles are autonomous and

rep-licate by fission This growth-and-fission model was

supported by the finding that peroxisomal membrane

and matrix proteins are synthesized on free polysomes

and post-translationally incorporated into pre-existing

organelles In this view the close connection of growing

peroxisomes with the endoplasmic reticulum was

inter-preted to mean the endoplasmic reticulum served as a

source of membrane lipids More recently, evidence

has accumulated in support of a model suggesting that

peroxisomes can arise de novo from the endoplasmic

reticulum This phenomenon was in observed

par-ticularly in specific peroxisome-deficient (pex) yeast

mutants (which lack any peroxisome membrane

rem-nants) upon re-introduction of the corresponding gene

[5–8] Recently, it became clear that the two

machiner-ies – de novo synthesis from the endoplasmic reticulum

and fission of pre-existing peroxisomes – may occur

simultaneously, especially in higher eukaryotes and

in the yeast Yarrowia lipolytica [9–12] However, in wild-type strains of the yeasts Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Hansenula polymorpha this is probably not true, because in these species peroxisomes seem to prolifer-ate exclusively by fission [13,14] In these yeast species

de novo formation is only observed during conditions when the cells lack peroxisomes, in which, by defini-tion, peroxisomes cannot be formed by fission of a pre-existing organelle

Peroxisome formation from the endoplasmic reticulum

De novoperoxisome formation has predominantly been studied in cells with a defect in PEX3 Yeast pex3 cells lack any peroxisome membrane structures, but intact peroxisomes re-appear after re-introduction of the cor-responding deleted gene Upon re-introduction of the PEX3 gene in pex3 cells, the Pex3 produced is first sorted to the perinuclear or cortical endoplasmic retic-ulum, after which it colocalizes with Pex19 in specific compartments, termed pre-peroxisomes In this sce-nario, Pex3 is suggested to be essential for the forma-tion of this initial vesicular subcompartment where it serves as a docking site for Pex19–peroxisomal mem-brane protein complexes that are essential to direct

Fig 1 Hypothetical model of peroxisome abundance In wild-type yeast cells peroxisome numbers may be maintained by a balance between four processes (1) Peroxisome formation from the endoplasmic reticulum (involving Pex3), during which a pre-peroxisomal struc-ture is formed that grows by importing newly synthesized peroxisomal membrane and matrix proteins to form a mastruc-ture peroxisome (2) Per-oxisome fission (involving Pex11 and DRPs), during which a mature perPer-oxisome first elongates, and then divides, to form a new small peroxisome that can grow to form a mature peroxisome (3) Peroxisome inheritance (involving Myo2, Inp2, Inp1, Pex3 and Pex19), in which peroxisomes are faithfully inherited into the newly formed bud (3a) and ⁄ or are retained in the mother cell (3b) during cell division (4) Peroxi-some degradation, when redundant ⁄ exhausted organelles are degraded in the vacuole.

Trang 3

various peroxisomal membrane proteins to this newly

formed structure Once a functional peroxisomal

matrix protein import complex is formed, these

pre-peroxisomal structures will import matrix proteins (see

the review by Wolf et al [15] in this miniseries), grow

and subsequently multiply by fission However, the

molecular details of this pathway, for instance the

principles of Pex3 docking and subsequent vesicle

for-mation from the endoplasmic reticulum (which is

pre-dominantly resolved by advanced live-cell imaging

techniques), are still an enigma

The endoplasmic reticulum, as a template for

de novoperoxisome formation during complementation

of yeast pex3 cells, is not debated During this process,

Pex3 is first targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum and,

at a later stage, is present at the peroxisomal

mem-brane However, whether Pex3 invariably traffics via

the endoplasmic reticulum to peroxisomes (i.e also in

wild-type cells), is still uncertain In fact, recent data in

mammalian cells [16,17] indicated that newly

synthe-sized Pex3 protein can also directly sort to pre-existing

peroxisomes

In wild-type cells, peroxisomal membrane proteins

other than Pex3 have also been suggested to travel via

the endoplasmic reticulum to pre-existing organelles

However, the transient localization of certain

peroxi-somal membrane proteins at the endoplasmic

reticu-lum (e.g Pichia pastoris Pex30 and Pex31 [18] may

also be related to other processes For instance, a

vesicular transport pathway has been suggested to exist

which transports endoplasmic reticulum-derived lipids,

together with certain peroxisomal membrane proteins,

to peroxisomes However, recent data indicate that

phopholipids are probably directly transferred from

the endoplasmic reticulum to peroxisomes without

vesicular transport [19] Hence, the physiological role

of the localization of certain peroxisomal membrane

proteinss at the endoplasmic reticulum needs further analysis

The peroxisome fission machinery

Based on studies of the function of Pex11b in mam-malian cells, the process of peroxisome fission has been proposed to involve four, partially overlapping, consecutive steps, namely (a) the insertion of Pex11b into the membrane, (b) the elongation of peroxisomes, (c) the segregation of Pex11b and the formation of Pex11b-enriched patches and (d) the division of per-oxisomes [20,21] (see also Fig 2) Pex11b (or its homolog in other organisms) is important for the ini-tial stages of peroxisome fission (steps a–c), whereas the organelle fission machinery is responsible for the final step (d)

The yeast homolog of mammalian Pex11b is Pex11 Upon overexpression of S cerevisiae PEX11, elongated clusters of peroxisomes were observed and the cyto-plasm of the cells was crowded with peroxisomes [22,23] In contrast, deletion of PEX11 resulted in a strong decrease in peroxisome numbers, which was paralleled by a strong increase in size Very similar observations have been made in many other organisms (e.g filamentous fungi, trypanosomes and human cells; reviewed previously [21]), indicating that the role of Pex11 in peroxisome elongation is highly conserved

Of all the PEX genes known, the expression levels

of PEX11 are enhanced most when peroxisome prolif-eration is induced This is true upon shifting S cerevi-siae cells from glucose- to oleic acid-containing media [24,25], as well as for H polymorpha cells shifted from glucose to methanol [26] Hence, modulating Pex11 levels is an important mode to vary peroxisome abun-dance Unexpectedly, mammalian Pex11b is not induced by peroxisome proliferators

Fig 2 Morphological stages of peroxisome fission Ultrathin sections of KMnO4-fixed cells grown in a methanol-limited chemostat at

D = 0.12 h)1, demonstrating the three stages involved during peroxisome inheritance: (A) elongation into the bud; (B) separation of a small organelle; and (C) the actual fission and migration of a small organelle into the bud The bar represents 0.5 lm.

Trang 4

Recently, Knoblach & Rachubinski [27] showed that

in vivo S cerevisiae Pex11 exists in two isoforms,

namely a phosphorylated form and a dephosphorylated

form Interestingly, studies using PEX11

phosphomim-icking mutants indicated that strains producing only

constitutively dephosphorylated Pex11 show a

pheno-type similar to that of pex11 cells, whereas strains

producing constitutive phosphorylated Pex11 show

enhanced peroxisome proliferation, similar to that of

Pex11-overproducing cells This suggests that Pex11

phosphorylation may include a mechanism to regulate

Pex11 activation⁄ inactivation

A recent study of 249 S cerevisiae kinase- and

phos-phatase-deletion strains [28] indeed indicated that

phosphorylation processes are crucial in regulating

per-oxisome abundance In particular, deletion of PHO85,

a cyclin-dependent kinase, had a strongly negative

effect on peroxisome numbers Interestingly,

overex-pression of PHO85 results in hyperphosphorylation of

Pex11 and peroxisome proliferation [27]

The second class of proteins essential for peroxisome

fission is the family of dynamin-related proteins

(DRPs) DRPs are large GTPases that are involved in

membrane fission and fusion events In S cerevisiae,

two DRPs – Vps1 and Dnm1 – play a role in

peroxi-some fission Dnm1 also plays a role in mitochondrial

fission Dnm1 is, in particular, essential for peroxisome

fission during conditions of peroxisome induction by

oleate [29], whereas Vps1 functions in peroxisome

rep-lication under repressing conditions (e.g in the

pres-ence of glucose) Dnm1 is recruited to peroxisomes via

two homologus proteins, Mdv1 and Caf4, which are

associated with the peroxisomal membrane via the

tail-anchored protein, Fis1 [30] Mdv1 is a WD repeat

pro-tein, which is absent in higher eukaryotes Caf4 is an

Mdv1 paralog in S cerevisiae that is absent in other

organisms

In S cerevisiae, Vps1 is involved in peroxisome

fis-sion [29]; however, in H polymorpha, Vps1 does not

play a role in this process [14] In this respect, H

poly-morpha seems to be more similar to mammalian and

plant cells, where a single DRP (Dlp1 or DRP3A,

respectively) is involved in peroxisome fission

Interest-ingly, in Arabidopsis thaliana, it has been shown that

the DRP 5B is responsible for the fission of

chlorop-lasts as well as of peroxisomes [31] Additionally in

A thaliana it has been shown that three out of five

PEX11 isoforms (PEX11c, PEX11d and PEX11e) are

important in the recruitment of Fis1b to the

peroxi-some membrane for the replication of pre-existing

per-oxisomes [32] Similarly, in mammals, Fis1 interacts

with Pex11b [33] As for other peroxisomal membrane

proteins, Pex19, a peroxin important for peroxisomal

membrane biogenesis, is also important for the target-ing of Fis1 to peroxisomes in mammals [34]

Remarkably, the Fis1–DRP organelle fission machinery was initially identified as being responsible for mitochondrial fission [30] Indeed, Fis1 and Dnm1 show a dual localization on peroxisomes and mito-chondria In contrast to peroxisomal Fis1, no proteins involved in Fis1 targeting to mitochondria have yet been identified

Why both organelles share the same fission machin-ery is unknown, but this may serve as a mechanism to coordinate mitochondrial and peroxisome fission (e.g during the cell cycle) Fluorescence microscopy studies

in H polymorpha revealed that green fluorescent pro-tein (GFP)-conjugated Dnm1 is not evenly distributed over the cytosol, but is present as multiple spots that contain many GFP–Dnm1 molecules Interestingly, Mdv1 co-localizes with these Dnm1 spots Live cell imaging revealed that these spots dynamically associate and disassociate from mitochondria and peroxisomes, stressing the fact that the same protein molecules are involved in the fission of both organelles [35]

Peroxisome fission in H polymorpha is fully blocked upon the deletion of DNM1 [14] These cells contain a single, enlarged peroxisome, which forms a long exten-sion that protrudes into the developing bud These extensions are not observed in dnm1 pex11 cells, which

is in agreement with the model in which Pex11 plays a role in peroxisome elongation Notably, as in mamma-lian cells [20], Pex11 is concentrated at the base of these peroxisome extensions in dnm1 cells, indicating that also in yeast the third step in peroxisome fission is the segregation of Pex11 and the formation of Pex11-enriched patches

Other proteins implemented in peroxisome development and abundance

Besides Pex3, Pex11 and Fis1⁄ DRPs as key compo-nents in determining organelle development and abun-dance, other proteins have been identified as regulators

of these processes These include components that were initially identified in the secretory pathway and various recently identified peroxins, and are discussed in more detail below

Components of the secretory pathway Several proteins known to play a role in the secretory pathway and localized to membranes of compartments involved in this pathway (e.g endoplasmic reticulum, Golgi, COP vesicles) have been suggested to play a

Trang 5

role in peroxisome abundance These proteins may be

important for de novo peroxisome formation or for the

delivery of endoplasmic reticulum-derived lipids to the

peroxisomal membrane

A recent study indicated a possible role for S

cerevi-siae SEC39, SEC21and DSL in the trafficking of

per-oxisomal membrane proteins from the endoplasmic

reticulum to the peroxisome [36] S cerevisiae ARF1

and ARF3 were also proposed to work antagonistically

during peroxisome proliferation [37]

Emp24 is a protein of the p24 family of proteins

and localizes to the Golgi apparatus, endoplasmic

reticulum and COP vesicles [38] However, a detailed

proteomics study in S cerevisiae suggested that Emp24

is also localized to peroxisomes [39] Moreover, in the

yeast H polymorpha, Emp24 was localized to

peroxi-somes and the endoplasmic reticulum [40]

Interest-ingly, deletion of EMP24 in H polymorpha resulted in

a strong reduction in peroxisome number

Unexpect-edly, this was not caused by a defect in the formation

of peroxisomes from the endoplasmic reticulum, but

by a defect in peroxisome fission Possibly, p24

pro-teins are required to bring various components

involved in peroxisome fission together at the

peroxi-somal membrane to allow organelle elongation at the

initial stage of peroxisome fission

A similar function has recently been suggested for

caveolin-1 at peroxisomes in mammalian cells [41]

Caveolin-1 is crucial for the formation of caveolae,

subtypes of microdomains⁄ rafts that are

morphologi-cally recognizable as flask-like invaginations in the

plasma membrane Recent localization studies in rat

hepatocytes revealed that caveolin-1 is also enriched in

the peroxisomal membrane A function for this protein

at the peroxisomal membrane, however, has not yet

been established

Peroxins

Besides Pex11, two other members of the S cerevisiae

Pex11 family – Pex25 and Pex27 – play a role in

per-oxisome proliferation [23] Data obtained from the

analysis of overexpression strains suggest that both

peripheral membrane proteins function in organelle

fis-sion, in particular under conditions when proliferation

of the organelles is repressed Also, proteins of the

Pex24 protein family (Pex24, Pex28 and Pex29) are

involved in regulating peroxisome numbers All three

proteins are components of the peroxisomal

mem-brane, of which Pex24, but not Pex28 and Pex29, is

induced by growth conditions that promote

peroxi-some proliferation (i.e oleate) Remarkably, deletion

of PEX28 and PEX29 in S cerevisiae is accompanied

by increased numbers of reduced-size organelles [42]

In addition, three other oleate-inducible baker’s yeast proteins (Pex30, Pex31 and Pex32), which show homol-ogy towards Y lipolytica Pex23, have been shown to

be involved in regulating peroxisome numbers [43]

Peroxisome inheritance

During vegetative reproduction of wild-type yeast cells, organelle replication is essential for maintaining the organelle population in the mother cells during multi-ple rounds of budding Upon division, part of the organelle population is administered to the bud In the methylotrophic yeast H polymorpha, this is accompa-nied by asymmetrical peroxisome fission and subse-quent migration of the newly formed, small organelle

to the developing bud The number of organelles migrating to the bud is dependent on the culture con-ditions [44] (Fig 3)

In yeast, peroxisome inheritance requires the func-tion of Inp1, Inp2, the class V myosin motor (Myo2) and the actin skeleton [45–47] Of these, Inp1 has been identified as the peroxisome-specific retention factor, connecting peroxisomes that are retained in the mother cells to a yet-unknown anchoring structure Similarly, Inp1 is also implemented in the retention of peroxi-somes in developing buds [45,48] Unexpectedly, in the absence of Pex11, peroxisome retention is also defec-tive in H polymorpha, despite the fact that Inp1 is properly localized to peroxisomes [48] Hence, Pex11 may have a second function in organelle retention in addition to its role in peroxisome fission

Recently, a function in peroxisome inheritance was also attributed to Pex3 [49] In an elegant study, Munck et al [49] demonstrated that Pex3 also func-tions in peroxisome retention The authors showed that Pex3 interacted directly with Inp1 at the peroxi-somal membrane and suggested a role for Pex3 to recruit Inp1 to the peroxisomal membrane Impor-tantly, the Inp1-binding region in the Pex3 protein could be separated from the regions involved in membrane formation during the de novo synthesis of peroxisomes [49] Hence, Pex3 is a multifunctional pro-tein in peroxisome biology, implemented in formation

of the peroxisome membrane and organelle inheritance Inp2 is a peroxisomal membrane protein that acts as the peroxisomal receptor for Myo2 and attaches the globular tail of Myo2 to the peroxisome, thus allowing transport of the organelle to the bud [46] Recently, the region of Myo2 involved in Inp2 binding was iden-tified using mutant variants of Myo2 [50] These stud-ies also showed that Inp2 is a phosphoprotein whose level of phosphorylation is coupled to the cell cycle

Trang 6

Chang et al [51] recently suggested that Inp2 is

unique for baker’s yeast and related species and

pro-vided evidence that Y lipolytica Pex3 and its paralog,

Pex3B, function as the peroxisome-specific receptors of

Myo2 A similar function was attributed to baker’s

yeast Pex3 However, in a subsequent study, Saraya

et al [52] demonstrated that Inp2, although weekly

conserved, is also present and functional in other yeast

species, including H polymorpha The finding that

H polymorpha Inp2 interacted with Myo2 points to a

conserved function for this protein as a binding factor

for Myo2 Remarkably, in H polymorpha, Myo2–Inp2

binding was dependent on Pex19 This is consistent

with the view that Pex19 may have a stabilizing role in

the interaction between Inp2 and Myo2, and also is in

line with the observed defect in peroxisome inheritance

in H polymorpha pex19 cells [53]

Constitutive peroxisome degradation

Peroxisomal membrane proteins are generally

post-translationally incorporated into the organelle

mem-brane This implies that the main quality-control

systems for these proteins reside outside the organelle

(i.e in the cytosol) However, peroxisomes do contain

a few specific proteases that are implemented in the

removal of exhausted or nonfunctional matrix

pro-teins Although different protease activities have been

detected in peroxisomes [54], so far only one gene

encoding a peroxisomal protease, a Lon protease, has been identified in yeast, in contrast to mammals where up to three proteases have been identified [55] Peroxisomal Lon of H polymorpha degrades short-lived or nonfunctional components of the peroxisomal lumen and therefore may participate in a housekeep-ing process aimed at maintainhousekeep-ing a functional peroxi-some population In the absence of Lon, protein aggregates may accumulate in the organelle lumen Such protein aggregates are probably devastating for organelle function and require removal of the entire organelle to maintain cell vitality Recent studies in human cells suggested that the peroxisomal Lon pro-tease is involved in accurate sorting, processing and activation of the peroxisomal enzyme acyl CoA oxidase [56]

Redundant organelles are removed by selective per-oxisome autophagy (see the review in this miniseries

by Oku & Sakai [57] for details) However, constitutive removal of peroxisomes is observed in H polymorpha when cultured under conditions that promote organelle proliferation Hence, under conditions of peroxisome induction, development and degradation of the organ-elles occurs simultaneously The data from Bener Aksam et al [55] suggest that constitutive peroxisome degradation suppresses the negative effects of deletion

of LON This is indicated by the observation that in

an ATG1 deletion background, in which peroxisome turnover is inhibited, deletion of the gene encoding

Fig 3 Peroxisome inheritance numbers vary with environmental conditions In budding cells of methanol-limited cultures of Hansenula poly-morpha cells grown at high dilution rates (A; D = 0.12 h)1), generally only a single peroxisome is inherited to the bud, whereas several small organelles are inherited to buds in cultures grown at low dilution rates (B; D = 0.03 h)1) Electron micrographs of thin sections are shown Cells are fixed in KMnO4 The bar represents 1 lm.

Trang 7

peroxisomal Lon resulted in a decrease of cell viability.

This is consistent with the view that timely removal of

these organelles is essential for cell viability Untimely

removal of peroxisomes may result in detrimental

effects (i.e the accumulation of reactive oxygen

spe-cies, finally resulting in cell death) [55] Constitutive

degradation of peroxisomes in H polymorpha is an

autophagic process and thus requires the function of

ATG genes However, the precise sequence of events

that mediate this constitutive degradation process is

still unknown and awaits further elucidation One

pos-sibility is that, similarly to mitochondria, fission

pro-cesses may be involved that allow separation of

dysfunctional, aggregate-containing parts, which are

specifically recognized for degradation [58]

Perspectives

Peroxisomes are extremely flexible and dynamic

organ-elles Several cues are known that cause rapid changes

in their abundance During recent years much progress

has been made in the identification and analysis of

genes involved in changing organelle abundance

How-ever, except for the proteins of the Fis1⁄ DRP organelle

fission machinery, the function of most other proteins

is still very speculative

One problem that may have been underestimated so

far is that – unlike for genes involved in peroxisome

protein import – the underlying mechanism of mutants

displaying aberrant organelle numbers may be related

to two, basically opposite, machineries Obviously, a

protein import defect results in cytosolic

mislocaliza-tion of matrix proteins However, alteramislocaliza-tions in

orga-nelle abundance may, in fact, reflect either defects in

organelle formation or, alternatively, in organelle

turn-over by autophagy Also, mutations that affect the rate

of the two opposite machineries of organelle formation

and degradation to the same extent, will result in an

unaltered steady-state number of peroxisomes Thus,

the mere organelle steady-state number, which is

gen-erally used to determine peroxisome abundance, is not

sufficiently informative about the actual rates of the

different processes that determine organelle abundance

in a separate cell

To understand in more detail the underlying reasons

for the presence of certain phenotypes there is an

urgent need to develop better techniques to establish

the phenotype of mutants more precisely Using live

cell imaging techniques the rates of the processes that

affect peroxisome abundance should be quantitatively

determined in vivo Such data could eventually be used

to develop mathematical models describing the kinetics

of these processes

Organelle fission and de novo synthesis could be studied using photoactivatable proteins or the HaloTag technology, as successfully used in mammalian cells [10,17] The rate of degradation can easily be deter-mined biochemically by determining protein half lives One way to determine the involvement of a gene in

de novosynthesis is to study the effect of mutations on functional complementation of a pex3 mutant with the PEX3 gene Using this approach we showed that DNM1, VPS1and EMP24 are not required for peroxi-some re-introduction from the endoplasmic reticulum

in H polymorpha pex3 cells [14,40] Interestingly, no mutations have so far been described that result in a defect in pex3 mutant complementation Why such genes⁄ mutations have not yet been identified is unknown Possibly these genes are also involved in other endoplasmic reticulum-related process and hence the mutations may be lethal

In addition to the detailed molecular mechanisms

of the various processes, their regulation is still lar-gely unexplored Important questions regarding this include the following What is the signal that triggers the peroxisomes to divide? How are organelles that should be degraded, retained or inherited, distin-guished from the other organelles of the total orga-nelle population?

Systems biology approaches have already been shown to be very helpful in this respect, for example, the analysis of kinase- and phosphatase-deficient mutants [28], proteomics and transcriptomics

Acknowledgements

We thank Rinse de Boer for preparing Figs 2 and 3 This project was carried out within the research pro-gramme of the Kluyver Centre for Genomics of Indus-trial Fermentation, which is part of the Netherlands Genomics Initiative⁄ Netherlands Organization for Sci-entific Research

References

1 Gabaldon T (2010) Peroxisome diversity and evolution Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 365, 765–773

2 van der Klei IJ & Veenhuis M (1997) Yeast peroxi-somes: function and biogenesis of a versatile cell orga-nelle Trends Microbiol 5, 502–509

3 Heiland I & Erdmann R (2005) Biogenesis of peroxi-somes Topogenesis of the peroxisomal membrane and matrix proteins Febs J 272, 2362–2372

4 Kiel JA, Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2006) PEX genes in fungal genomes: common, rare or redundant Traffic 7, 1291–1303

Trang 8

5 Tam YY, Fagarasanu A, Fagarasanu M & Rachubinski

RA (2005) Pex3p initiates the formation of a

preperox-isomal compartment from a subdomain of the

endo-plasmic reticulum in Saccharomyces cerevisiae J Biol

Chem 280, 34933–34939

6 Kragt A, Voorn-Brouwer T, van den Berg M & Distel

B (2005) Endoplasmic reticulum-directed Pex3p routes

to peroxisomes and restores peroxisome formation in a

Saccharomyces cerevisiaepex3Delta strain J Biol Chem

280, 34350–34357

7 Haan GJ, Baerends RJ, Krikken AM, Otzen M,

Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2006) Reassembly of

peroxisomes in Hansenula polymorpha pex3 cells on

reintroduction of Pex3p involves the nuclear envelope

FEMS Yeast Res 6, 186–194

8 Hoepfner D, Schildknegt D, Braakman I, Philippsen P

& Tabak HF (2005) Contribution of the endoplasmic

reticulum to peroxisome formation Cell 122, 85–95

9 Mullen RT & Trelease RN (2006) The ER-peroxisome

connection in plants: development of the ‘‘ER

semi-autonomous peroxisome maturation and replication’’

model for plant peroxisome biogenesis Biochim Biophys

Acta 1763, 1655–1668

10 Kim PK, Mullen RT, Schumann U &

Lippincott-Sch-wartz J (2006) The origin and maintenance of

mamma-lian peroxisomes involves a de novo PEX16-dependent

pathway from the ER J Cell Biol 173, 521–532

11 Titorenko VI, Smith JJ, Szilard RK & Rachubinski RA

(2000) Peroxisome biogenesis in the yeast Yarrowia

lipolytica Cell Biochem Biophys 32, 21–26

12 Nagotu S, Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2010) Divide et

impera: the dictum of peroxisomes Traffic 11, 175–184

13 Motley AM & Hettema EH (2007) Yeast peroxisomes

multiply by growth and division J Cell Biol 178, 399–

410

14 Nagotu S, Saraya R, Otzen M, Veenhuis M & van der

Klei IJ (2008) Peroxisome proliferation in

Hansenu-la polymorpharequires Dnm1p which mediates fission

but not de novo formation Biochim Biophys Acta 1783,

760–769

15 Wolf J, Wolfgang S & Erdmann R (2010) Peroxisomes as

dynamic organelles: peroxisomal matrix protein import

Febs J 277, 3268–3278

16 Matsuzaki T & Fujiki Y (2008) The peroxisomal

membrane protein import receptor Pex3p is directly

transported to peroxisomes by a novel Pex19p- and

Pex16p-dependent pathway J Cell Biol 183, 1275–1286

17 Huybrechts SJ, Van Veldhoven PP, Brees C,

Mannaerts GP, Los GV & Fransen M (2009)

Peroxi-some dynamics in cultured mammalian cells Traffic 10,

1722–1733

18 Yan M, Rachubinski DA, Joshi S, Rachubinski RA &

Subramani S (2008) Dysferlin domain-containing

pro-teins, Pex30p and Pex31p, localized to two

compart-ments, control the number and size of oleate-induced

peroxisomes in Pichia pastoris Mol Biol Cell 19, 885– 898

19 Raychaudhuri S & Prinz WA (2008) Nonvesicular phos-pholipid transfer between peroxisomes and the endo-plasmic reticulum Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105, 15785–15790

20 Schrader M, Reuber BE, Morrell JC, Jimenez-Sanchez

G, Obie C, Stroh TA, Valle D, Schroer TA & Gould SJ (1998) Expression of PEX11beta mediates peroxisome proliferation in the absence of extracellular stimuli

J Biol Chem 273, 29607–29614

21 Thoms S & Erdmann R (2005) Dynamin-related pro-teins and Pex11 propro-teins in peroxisome division and proliferation Febs J 272, 5169–5181

22 Marshall PA, Krimkevich YI, Lark RH, Dyer JM, Veenhuis M & Goodman JM (1995) Pmp27 promotes peroxisomal proliferation J Cell Biol 129, 345–355

23 Rottensteiner H, Stein K, Sonnenhol E & Erdmann R (2003) Conserved function of pex11p and the novel pex25p and pex27p in peroxisome biogenesis Mol Biol Cell 14, 4316–4328

24 Koerkamp MG, Rep M, Bussemaker HJ, Hardy GP, Mul A, Piekarska K, Szigyarto CA, De Mattos JM & Tabak HF (2002) Dissection of transient oxidative stress response in Saccharomyces cerevisiae by using DNA microarrays Mol Biol Cell 13, 2783–2794

25 Smith JJ, Marelli M, Christmas RH, Vizeacoumar FJ, Dilworth DJ, Ideker T, Galitski T, Dimitrov K, Rachu-binski RA & Aitchison JD (2002) Transcriptome profil-ing to identify genes involved in peroxisome assembly and function J Cell Biol 158, 259–271

26 van Zutphen T, Baerends RJ, Susanna KA, de Jong A, Kuipers OP, Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2010) Adaptation of Hansenula polymorpha to methanol:

a transcriptome analysis BMC Genomics 11, 1

27 Knoblach B & Rachubinski RA (2010) Phosphoryla-tion-dependent activation of peroxisome proliferator protein PEX11 controls peroxisome abundance J Biol Chem 285, 6670–6680

28 Saleem RA, Knoblach B, Mast FD, Smith JJ, Boyle J, Dobson CM, Long-O’Donnell R, Rachubinski RA & Aitchison JD (2008) Genome-wide analysis of signaling networks regulating fatty acid-induced gene expression and organelle biogenesis J Cell Biol 181, 281–292

29 Kuravi K, Nagotu S, Krikken AM, Sjollema K, Deckers M, Erdmann R, Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2006) Dynamin-related proteins Vps1p and Dnm1p control peroxisome abundance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae J Cell Sci 119, 3994–4001

30 Mozdy AD, McCaffery JM & Shaw JM (2000) Dnm1p GTPase-mediated mitochondrial fission is a multi-step process requiring the novel integral membrane compo-nent Fis1p J Cell Biol 151, 367–380

31 Zhang X & Hu J (2010) The Arabidopsis chloroplast division protein DYNAMIN-RELATED PROTEIN5B

Trang 9

also mediates peroxisome division Plant Cell 22, 431–

442

32 Lingard MJ, Gidda SK, Bingham S, Rothstein SJ,

Mullen RT & Trelease RN (2008) Arabidopsis

PEROXIN11c-e, FISSION1b, and

DYNAMIN-RELATED PROTEIN3A cooperate in cell

cycle-associ-ated replication of peroxisomes Plant Cell 20,

1567–1585

33 Kobayashi S, Tanaka A & Fujiki Y (2007) Fis1, DLP1,

and Pex11p coordinately regulate peroxisome

morpho-genesis Exp Cell Res 313, 1675–1686

34 Delille HK & Schrader M (2008) Targeting of hFis1 to

peroxisomes is mediated by Pex19p J Biol Chem 283,

31107–31115

35 Nagotu S, Krikken AM, Otzen M, Kiel JA, Veenhuis

M & van der Klei IJ (2008) Peroxisome fission in

Han-senula polymorpharequires Mdv1 and Fis1, two

pro-teins also involved in mitochondrial fission Traffic 9,

1471–1484

36 Perry RJ, Mast FD & Rachubinski RA (2009)

Endo-plasmic reticulum-associated secretory proteins Sec20p,

Sec39p, and Dsl1p are involved in peroxisome

biogene-sis Eukaryot Cell 8, 830–843

37 Lay D, B LG, Heid H, Gorgas K & Just WW (2005)

Binding and functions of ADP-ribosylation factor on

mammalian and yeast peroxisomes J Biol Chem 280,

34489–34499

38 Carney GE & Bowen NJ (2004) p24 proteins,

intracellu-lar trafficking, and behavior: Drosophila melanogaster

provides insights and opportunities Biol Cell 96,

271–278

39 Marelli M, Smith JJ, Jung S, Yi E, Nesvizhskii AI,

Christmas RH, Saleem RA, Tam YY, Fagarasanu A,

Goodlett DR et al (2004) Quantitative mass

spectrome-try reveals a role for the GTPase Rho1p in actin

organi-zation on the peroxisome membrane J Cell Biol 167,

1099–1112

40 Kurbatova E, Otzen M & van der Klei IJ (2009) p24

proteins play a role in peroxisome proliferation in yeast

FEBS Lett 583, 3175–3180

41 Woudenberg J, Rembacz KP, van den Heuvel FA,

Woudenberg-Vrenken TE, Buist-Homan M, Geuken M,

Hoekstra M, Deelman LE, Enrich C, Henning RH et al

(2009) Caveolin-1 is enriched in the peroxisomal

mem-brane of rat hepatocytes Hepatology 51, 1744–1753

42 Vizeacoumar FJ, Torres-Guzman JC, Tam YY,

Aitchison JD & Rachubinski RA (2003) YHR150w and

YDR479c encode peroxisomal integral membrane

pro-teins involved in the regulation of peroxisome number,

size, and distribution in Saccharomyces cerevisiae J Cell

Biol 161, 321–332

43 Vizeacoumar FJ, Torres-Guzman JC, Bouard D,

Aitchison JD & Rachubinski RA (2004) Pex30p,

Pex31p, and Pex32p form a family of peroxisomal

integral membrane proteins regulating peroxisome size

and number in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mol Biol Cell

15, 665–677

44 Veenhuis M, van Dijken JP, Pilon SA & Harder W (1978) Development of crystalline peroxisomes in meth-anol-grown cells of the yeast Hansenula polymorpha and its relation to environmental conditions Arch Microbiol

117, 153–163

45 Fagarasanu M, Fagarasanu A, Tam YY, Aitchison JD

& Rachubinski RA (2005) Inp1p is a peroxisomal mem-brane protein required for peroxisome inheritance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae J Cell Biol 169, 765–775

46 Fagarasanu A, Fagarasanu M, Eitzen GA, Aitchison

JD & Rachubinski RA (2006) The peroxisomal mem-brane protein Inp2p is the peroxisome-specific receptor for the myosin V motor Myo2p of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Dev Cell 10, 587–600

47 Hoepfner D, van den Berg M, Philippsen P, Tabak HF

& Hettema EH (2001) A role for Vps1p, actin, and the Myo2p motor in peroxisome abundance and inheritance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae J Cell Biol 155, 979–990

48 Krikken AM, Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2009) Hansenula polymorpha pex11cells are affected in peroxi-some retention Febs J 276, 1429–1439

49 Munck JM, Motley AM, Nuttall JM & Hettema EH (2009) A dual function for Pex3p in peroxisome forma-tion and inheritance J Cell Biol 187, 463–471

50 Fagarasanu A, Mast FD, Knoblach B, Jin Y, Brunner

MJ, Logan MR, Glover JN, Eitzen GA, Aitchison

JD, Weisman LS et al (2009) Myosin-driven peroxi-some partitioning in S cerevisiae J Cell Biol 186, 541–554

51 Chang J, Mast FD, Fagarasanu A, Rachubinski DA, Eitzen GA, Dacks JB & Rachubinski RA (2009) Pex3 peroxisome biogenesis proteins function in peroxisome inheritance as class V myosin receptors J Cell Biol 187, 233–246

52 Saraya R, Cepinska MN, Kiel JA, Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2010) A conserved function for Inp2 in peroxisome inheritance Biochim Biophys Acta 1803, 617–622

53 Otzen M, Krikken AM, Ozimek PZ, Kurbatova E, Nagotu S, Veenhuis M & van der Klei IJ (2006) In the yeast Hansenula polymorpha, peroxisome formation from the ER is independent of Pex19p, but involves the func-tion of p24 proteins FEMS Yeast Res 6, 1157–1166

54 Stewart MQ, van Dijk R, Veenhuis M & Goodman JM (2002) Monomeric alcohol oxidase is preferentially digested by a novel protease from Candida boidinii Biochim Biophys Acta 1542, 160–172

55 Aksam EB, Koek A, Kiel JA, Jourdan S, Veenhuis M

& van der Klei IJ (2007) A peroxisomal lon protease and peroxisome degradation by autophagy play key roles in vitality of Hansenula polymorpha cells

Autophagy 3, 96–105

Trang 10

56 Omi S, Nakata R, Okamura-Ikeda K, Konishi H &

Taniguchi H (2008) Contribution of peroxisome-specific

isoform of Lon protease in sorting PTS1 proteins to

peroxisomes J Biochem 143, 649–660

57 Oku M & Sakai Y (2010) Peroxisomes as dynamic

organelles: autophagic degradation FEBS J 277,

3289–3294

58 Twig G, Elorza A, Molina AJ, Mohamed H, Wikstrom

JD, Walzer G, Stiles L, Haigh SE, Katz S, Las G et al (2008) Fission and selective fusion govern mitochondrial segregation and elimination by autophagy EMBO J 27, 433–446

Ngày đăng: 15/03/2014, 23:20

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN

TÀI LIỆU CÙNG NGƯỜI DÙNG

TÀI LIỆU LIÊN QUAN

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm